What drives the relevance and reputation of economics journals? An update from a survey among economists

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in AbstractThis is paper analyses the interrelationship between perceived journal relevance and reputation. Based on a survey of 705 members of the German Economic Association, we find a strong interrelationship between journal reputation and relevance where a journal's perceived relevance has a stronger effect on the journal's reputation than vice versa. Moreover, past journal ratings conducted by the Handelsblatt and the German Economic Association (GEA) directly affect journals' reputation among German economists and indirectly also their perceived relevance, but the effect on reputation is more than twice as large as the effect on perceived relevance. In general, citations have a non-linear impact on perceived journal reputation and relevance. While the number of landmark articles published in a journal increases reputation, an increase in the so-called H-index even tends to decrease a journal's perceived relevance, as long as this is not simultaneously reflected in a higher Handelsblatt-and/or GEA-rating. We also identify significant differences in the views on journal relevance and reputation between different age groups.JEL Codes: A11, A14, I23, L82

Indicators as judgment devices: An empirical study of citizen bibliometrics in research evaluation

“…The heterogeneity in research practices and publication strategies, as well as agreement on research goals and methods, are some of the factors that are likely to influence the assessment of research among members of the respective communities. The widespread presence of bibliometrics in biomedicine and economics has been widely reported in the scientometric research literature, mostly by way of technical discussions about measures used to evaluate outputs (Graber, Launov and W€ alde 2008;Haucap and Muck 2015). The broad coverage of biomedical literature in Web of Science, and later Scopus, together with the sheer size of the field has contributed to a frequent use of performance indicators in the field (de Bellis 2009;Van Eck et al 2013).…”

Finance journal rankings: a paper affiliation methodology

“…Moreover, some studies have been criticized for lacking a representative sample of journals and for the inability to examine trends (Singh et al, 2007), and for a non-response bias (Kao et al, 2016), on account of the response rates usually being low. Memory also plays a role since the ratings are affected by the journal's reputation, which is mainly formed by the past reputation (Coe and Weinstock, 1983;Haucap and Muck, 2015). It was also observed that the evaluation criteria for assessing the journals differed according to the type of expert consulted (Kim, 1991); and that there are biases derived from the characteristics of the journals such as their orientation, that is whether they are academic or practitioner journals, national or foreign, refereed or non-refereed journals or other aspects like age or size, for example number of articles published per year (Haucap and Muck, 2015;Kim, 1991;Serenko and Dohan, 2011;Tahai and Meyer, 1999).…”

“…Memory also plays a role since the ratings are affected by the journal's reputation, which is mainly formed by the past reputation (Coe and Weinstock, 1983; Haucap and Muck, 2015). It was also observed that the evaluation criteria for assessing the journals differed according to the type of expert consulted (Kim, 1991); and that there are biases derived from the characteristics of the journals such as their orientation, that is whether they are academic or practitioner journals, national or foreign, refereed or non-refereed journals or other aspects like age or size, for example number of articles published per year (Haucap and Muck, 2015; Kim, 1991; Serenko and Dohan, 2011; Tahai and Meyer, 1999). In Table 1, we compile a list of weaknesses and strengths of the stated preference approach.…”

Lecturas de Economía

“…De otra parte, es indudable que la mayor parte de la discusión académica de frontera en economía está publicada en inglés (Stigler et al, 1995, p. 332; Henshall, 2018. Incluso en países de habla distinta a la inglesa, los académicos que recién inician sus carreras profesionales son los más deseosos de publicar en la lengua anglosajona (Haucap & Muck, 2015). Es más, se ha vuelto cada vez más frecuente que las revistas en países no anglosajones acepten publicar artículos en inglés, amén del idioma local u otras lenguas.…”