|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | Daniel Souza; Aldo Geuna; Cornelia Lawson |
| Abstract: | The paper studies the development of the Economics of Science as a new emerging field in the social sciences during the period 1994-2023. To identify the community of scholars working on this new scientific topic, we examine authors citing two seminal papers and use network analysis to investigate the cognitive and organizational characteristics of the community of authors. Our findings suggest that the Economics of Science is still in the process of becoming an independent and cohesive field, exhibiting a highly fragmented structure. We also study the role of the "Workshop on the Organisation, Economics, and Policy of Scientific Research" (WOEPS), initiated in 2007, for the Economics of Science community. We show that WOEPS presenters have more economists of science as coauthors and are better positioned to connect different clusters of authors in the wider Economics of Science network than other members of the network, highlighting its importance for linking scholars in the field. We also show that WOEPS papers are published in higher "quality" journals, receive relatively more citations, and significantly more citations from within the Economics of Science field compared to other Economics of Science papers. |
| Keywords: | Economics of Science, Scientific Communities, Network Analysis, Field Formation |
| Date: | 2025 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cca:wpaper:745 |
| By: | Charness, Gary; Dreber, Anna (Stockholm School of Economics); Evans, Daniel; Gill, Adam; Toussaert, Severine (University of Oxford) |
| Abstract: | Peer review is central to the lives of researchers. We conduct a survey on improving peer review to which we received responses from over 1, 400 economists. The survey is the bedrock of this article, which was written to (i) document the current state of peer review and (ii) investigate concrete steps towards improving it. We offer a snapshot of the recent submission and peer review activity of respondents, detail the difficulties they report facing, and measure their attitudes about various challenges and possible proposals to address them. We hope that this report will provide fertile ground for the development and implementation of practical solutions for improving peer review in economics. |
| Date: | 2025–07–10 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:metaar:k9ybz_v1 |
| By: | Eleonora Alabrese; Francesco Capozza; Prashant Garg |
| Abstract: | As social media is increasingly popular, we examine the reputational costs of its increased centrality among academics. Analyzing posts of 98, 000 scientists on Twitter (2016–2022) reveals substantial and varied political discourse. We assess the impact of such online political expression with online experiments on a representative sample of 3, 700 U.S. respondents and 135 journalists who rate vignettes of synthetic academic profiles with varied political affiliations. Politically neutral scientists are viewed as the most credible. Strikingly, on both the ’left’ and ’right’ sides of politically neutral, there is a monotonic penalty for scientists displaying political affiliations: the stronger their posts, the less credible their profile and research are perceived, and the lower the public’s will¬ingness to read their content, especially among oppositely aligned respondents. A survey of 128 scientists shows awareness of this penalty and a consensus on avoiding political expression outside their expertise. |
| Date: | 2025 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:not:notnic:2025-09 |
| By: | Elsa Fontainha; Tanya Araújo |
| Abstract: | This paper investigates International Research Collaboration (IRC) among European Union (EU) countries from 2011 to 2022, with emphasis on gender-based authorship patterns. Drawing from the Web of Science Social Science Citation Index (WoS-SSCI) database, a large dataset of IRC articles was constructed, annotated with categories of authorship based on gender, author affiliation, and COVID-19 subject as topic. Using network science, the study maps collaboration structures and reveals gendered differences in co-authorship networks. Results highlight a substantial rise in IRC over the decade, particularly with the USA and China as key non-EU partners. Articles with at least one female author were consistently less frequent than those with at least one male author. Notably, female-exclusive collaborations showed distinctive network topologies, with more centralized (star-like) patterns and shorter tree diameters. The COVID-19 pandemic further reshaped collaboration dynamics, temporarily reducing the gender gap in IRC but also revealing vulnerabilities in female-dominated research networks. These findings underscore both progress and persistent disparities in the gender dynamics of EU participation in IRC. |
| Keywords: | International Research Collaboration, European Union, Network Analysis, Gender differences, Scientometrics. |
| Date: | 2025–07 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ise:remwps:wp03822025 |