|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | François Claveau (UdeS - Université de Sherbrooke = University of Sherbrooke [Sherbrooke]); Jacob Hamel-Mottiez (ULaval - Université Laval [Québec]); Alexandre Truc (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UniCA - Université Côte d'Azur); Conrad Heilmann (Erasmus University Rotterdam) |
| Abstract: | We present bibliometric evidence for increasing estrangement between the philosophy of economics and economics itself. Our analysis centers on research articles published in the Journal of Economic Methodology (JEM) between 1994 and 2021. We analyze the citations within these research articles, in particular with respect to the citations of economics. Our results are fourfold. (1) The share of economic citations in JEM articles has been decreasing. (2) The remaining economic citations in JEM articles are increasingly older relative to citation patterns within economics. (3) The profile of economic citations in JEM articles is increasingly dissimilar when compared to what is cited within economics. (4) There is decreasing diversity with regards to the share of attention towards different economic subfields in the articles published in JEM when compared to economics. We discuss interpretations of this evidence for estrangement between philosophy of economics and economics. |
| Keywords: | B20, scientometrics, bibliometrics, digital humanities, diversity, philosophy of economics |
| Date: | 2025–07–14 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05543086 |
| By: | Alexandre Truc (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UniCA - Université Côte d'Azur); François Claveau (UdeS - Université de Sherbrooke = University of Sherbrooke [Sherbrooke]); Catherine Herfeld (Leibniz Universität Hannover = Leibniz University Hannover); Vincent Larivière (UdeM - Université de Montréal) |
| Abstract: | This study examines gender diversity among authors in philosophy and methodology of economics, comparing it to the disciplines of economics and philosophy. Using bibliometric methods, we find that philosophy and methodology of economics, as an interdisciplinary field, consistently had a lower share of women authors than its parent disciplines, which are the two social sciences and humanities disciplines that are the furthest from gender parity. Although homogeneity compounding generally characterizes the whole field of philosophy and methodology of economics, one small and temporary subfield, making contributions to heterodox economics, structural realism, and the discussion on pluralism in economics, constituted a pocket of gender diversity. Alongside a more general discussion of possible reasons behind the striking gender imbalance in the field, we also elaborate on possible reasons for the limited size and duration of this pocket of diversity. |
| Keywords: | Scientometrics, diversity, gender, philosophy of economics, bibliometrics |
| Date: | 2025–07–29 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05543110 |
| By: | João Ricardo Faria; Rajeev K. Goel |
| Abstract: | In perfectly competitive academic and idea markets, a divide emerges between elite scientists and the rest. The elite publish original, impactful work, while others - absurd heroes - struggle for recognition, often in vain. Though the original ideas game produces an equilibrium resembling perfect competition, it is driven by a hierarchical structure. This reflects the organization of real-world science, where limited incentives and access prevent most researchers from publishing and advancing original ideas. |
| Keywords: | academic research, citations, scientific ideas, reputations, absurd heroes, elite scientists, differential games |
| JEL: | O30 C70 D83 |
| Date: | 2026 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ces:ceswps:_12590 |
| By: | Leyan Wu; Yong Huang; Wei Lu; Akrati Saxena; Vincent Traag |
| Abstract: | Scientific knowledge flows enable cumulative progress by connecting researchers across disciplines, institutions, and countries. Yet it remains unclear how geography and national structures continue to shape these exchanges in an increasingly connected world. Using a large-scale bibliometric dataset from OpenAlex, which covers 39.35 million publications across 95 countries and 3, 794 cities between 2000 and 2022, we examine global knowledge diffusion through two complementary channels: co-authorship and citation. We find that the constraining effect of geographic distance on collaboration has not diminished over time but has instead intensified, suggesting persistent structural or institutional barriers. Citation flows, by contrast, are less sensitive to spatial proximity, indicating that intellectual influence may diffuse more freely across borders. At the country level, research networks exhibit strong domestic preferences and a shared citation orientation toward the United States. China, while increasingly favored as a collaboration partner by other countries, continues to be systematically undercited within global citation flows. International mobility increases researchers' collaboration with scholars in their host country but has limited effects on citation flows. These results highlight the structural persistence of spatial and country biases in global science, with implications for equitable participation and recognition across regions. |
| Date: | 2026–04 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2604.01602 |
| By: | Alexandre Truc (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UniCA - Université Côte d'Azur) |
| Abstract: | Disciplinary mobility occurs when researchers publish outside their disciplines of origin. It is an important mechanism of interdisciplinarity and knowledge transfer. Behavioral economics (BE) was founded by two psychologists, Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, who used disciplinary mobility to influence economics. In this article, we study the disciplinary mobility of eight core behavioral economists to better understand how it has influenced the early development of BE and the interdisciplinary practices of later behavioral economists. Besides the movement of psychologists toward the core of economics, we identify an outward movement of economists away from the discipline. This movement away from economics has allowed some behavioral economists to escape some of the normative traditions of economics while establishing new forms of scientific legitimacy for economists. This has enabled them to push the frontiers of economics and promote a more radical approach to BE at the cost of an increasingly weaker relationship with the core concerns of economics. |
| Abstract: | La mobilité disciplinaire est le fait de publier hors de sa discipline d'origine. Il s'agit d'un mécanisme important d'interdisciplinarité et de transfert de connaissances. L'économie comportementale (EC) a été créée par deux psychologues, Daniel Kahneman et Amos Tversky, qui ont utilisé la mobilité disciplinaire pour influencer l'économie. Dans cet article, nous étudions la mobilité disciplinaire de huit économistes comportementaux afin de mieux comprendre comment cette mobilité a influencé le développement et les pratiques interdisciplinaires de l'EC. Outre le mouvement des psychologues vers le cœur de l'économie, nous identifions aussi un mouvement de certains économistes vers d'autres disciplines. Ce mouvement d'éloignement a permis à certains économistes comportementaux de trouver de nouvelles sources de légitimité scientifique dans d'autres disciplines, tout en échappant à certaines traditions normatives de l'économie. Cela leur a permis de repousser les frontières de l'économie et de promouvoir une approche plus radicale de l'EC au prix d'une relation de plus en plus ténue avec l'économie . |
| Keywords: | Behavioral Economics, Interdisciplinarity, Social Network Analysis |
| Date: | 2025 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05543132 |
| By: | Peter J. Dolton; Richard S. J. Tol |
| Abstract: | The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics has been awarded annually since 1969. Who wins the prize is a topic of much interest and tracks the whole course of the academic discipline over the last 57 years. Explaining who wins the prize in any given year is a complex process, which involves the subtle endogeneity of the choice of the field and the individual(s) who should be honoured. Citations, track records, networks of past winners, institutional factors along with field rotation and Economic Prize Committee composition may all play a role. A dynamic sample involving a changing stock of would-be candidates along with a moving flow -- both into and out of the sample -- add complexities to the modelling. We find robust evidence that the Nobel Prize rotates in a semi-regular way between the fields of economics. Earlier awards were for a single paper, later ones for a body of work. Networks do not matter, but having a Nobel student or co-author does. There is some evidence that the personal preferences of Committee members had an effect on either field or individual winner. The Committee's decisions changed after Lindbeck retired. |
| Date: | 2026–03 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2603.20767 |
| By: | Donna K. Ginther; Joshua L. Rosenbloom |
| Abstract: | This chapter examines the dramatic growth and evolving role of postdoctoral researchers in the U.S. scientific workforce from 1979 to 2023, highlighting a fourfold increase in postdoc numbers that outpaced growth in graduate students and faculty. We argue that this expansion reflects the fragmented nature of science funding, particularly the effects of the NIH budget doubling in the early 2000s, which increased both supply and demand for postdocs but ultimately worsened employment conditions. The chapter also explores the career outcomes of postdocs, noting limited economic returns outside academia and declining transitions to faculty roles. With recent declines in postdoc numbers, tightening immigration policies, and rising compensation, it seems likely that the U.S. may have reached “peak postdoc, ” potentially leading to reduced future research output. The chapter concludes with a call for improved data and further research to better understand postdocs’ roles in scientific production and career development. |
| JEL: | I23 J40 |
| Date: | 2026–03 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:35014 |
| By: | Alexandre Truc (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UniCA - Université Côte d'Azur) |
| Date: | 2025–02–20 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05543096 |