IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jculte/v48y2024i2d10.1007_s10824-023-09488-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The rule of tome? Longer novels are more likely to win literary awards

Author

Listed:
  • Féidhlim P. McGowan

    (University of Galway)

Abstract

Longer novels on shortlists are significantly more likely to win literary awards. This relationship is shown using all shortlisted novels for three prestigious prizes—the Booker Prize, the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction, and the National Book Award for Fiction, over the time period 1963–2021. The result is robust to controlling for author gender and Goodreads rating, and to whether one uses absolute length (in pages) or relative length on the shortlist. The size of the effect suggests other valid cues are underweighted in the process of selecting a winner. Judgment and decision-making research suggests several causes of the apparent bias. One is the representativeness heuristic: longer novels resemble the tomes that constitute the foundations of the Western canon, and this similarity may subconsciously sway judges. Other explanations include an effort heuristic and the effects of accountability on decisions. These results may explain previous findings that Booker Prize winners are not higher quality than shortlisted novels. The findings cast doubt on the validity of awards as signals of literary merit and have broader implications for the inferred quality of expert judgment.

Suggested Citation

  • Féidhlim P. McGowan, 2024. "The rule of tome? Longer novels are more likely to win literary awards," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 48(2), pages 311-329, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jculte:v:48:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10824-023-09488-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10824-023-09488-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10824-023-09488-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10824-023-09488-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. V. Ginsburgh & Sheila Weyers, 2014. "Nominees, winners, and losers," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 38(4), pages 291-313, November.
    2. Victor A. Ginsburgh & Jan C. van Ours, 2003. "Expert Opinion and Compensation: Evidence from a Musical Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 289-296, March.
    3. Victor Ginsburgh & Sheila Weyers, 1999. "On the Perceived Quality of Movies," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 23(4), pages 269-283, November.
    4. Troutman, C Michael & Shanteau, James, 1976. "Do Consumers Evaluate Products by Adding or Averaging Attribute Information?," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 3(2), pages 101-106, Se.
    5. Jacobsen, Grant D., 2015. "Consumers, experts, and online product evaluations: Evidence from the brewing industry," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 114-123.
    6. Mehta, Judith & Starmer, Chris & Sugden, Robert, 1994. "The Nature of Salience: An Experimental Investigation of Pure Coordination Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(3), pages 658-673, June.
    7. Gabrielle S. Adams & Benjamin A. Converse & Andrew H. Hales & Leidy E. Klotz, 2021. "People systematically overlook subtractive changes," Nature, Nature, vol. 592(7853), pages 258-261, April.
    8. Michela Ponzo & Vincenzo Scoppa, 2015. "Experts’ awards and economic success: evidence from an Italian literary prize," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 39(4), pages 341-367, November.
    9. John Ashworth & Bruno Heyndels & Kristien Werck, 2010. "Expert judgements and the demand for novels in Flanders," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 34(3), pages 197-218, August.
    10. Julia A. Minson & Jennifer S. Mueller & Richard P. Larrick, 2018. "The Contingent Wisdom of Dyads: When Discussion Enhances vs. Undermines the Accuracy of Collaborative Judgments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(9), pages 4177-4192, September.
    11. Brad M. Barber & Chip Heath & Terrance Odean, 2003. "Good Reasons Sell: Reason-Based Choice Among Group and Individual Investors in the Stock Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(12), pages 1636-1652, December.
    12. Victor Ginsburgh, 2003. "Awards, Success and Aesthetic Quality in the Arts," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(2), pages 99-111, Spring.
    13. Bruno S. Frey & Jana Gallus, 2017. "Towards An Economics Of Awards," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 190-200, February.
    14. Iain Pardoe & Dean K. Simonton, 2008. "Applying discrete choice models to predict Academy Award winners," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 171(2), pages 375-394, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nicolas Lagios & Pierre-Guillaume Méon, 2021. "Experts, Information, Reviews, and Coordination: Evidence on How Literary Prizes Affect Sales," Working Papers CEB 21-011, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    2. Martina Dattilo & Fabio Padovano & Yvon Rocaboy, 2023. "More is worse: the evolution of quality of the UNESCO World Heritage List and its determinants," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 47(1), pages 71-96, March.
    3. Victor Ginsburgh, 2016. "On Judging Art and Wine," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2016-21, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Marco Haan & S. Dijkstra & Peter Dijkstra, 2005. "Expert Judgment Versus Public Opinion – Evidence from the Eurovision Song Contest," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 29(1), pages 59-78, February.
    5. Michela Ponzo & Vincenzo Scoppa, 2015. "Experts’ awards and economic success: evidence from an Italian literary prize," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 39(4), pages 341-367, November.
    6. Francesco Angelini & Massimiliano Castellani, 2019. "Cultural and economic value: a critical review," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 43(2), pages 173-188, June.
    7. GINSBURGH, Victor & NOURY, Abdul, 2005. "Cultural voting : The Eurovision Song Contest," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2005006, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    8. António Osório, 2020. "Performance Evaluation: Subjectivity, Bias and Judgment Style in Sport," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 655-678, August.
    9. Nicolas G鲡rd Vaillant & François-Charles Wolff, 2013. "Understanding how experts rate cigars: a ‘havanometric’ analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(1), pages 99-109, January.
    10. Claire Dupin Beyssat & Diana Seave Greenwald & Kim Oosterlinck, 2023. "Measuring nepotism and sexism in artistic recognition: the awarding of medals at the Paris Salon, 1850–1880," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 47(3), pages 407-436, September.
    11. Ho Fai Chan & Bruno S. Frey & Jana Gallus & Benno Torgler, 2013. "Does the John Bates Clark Medal boost subsequent productivity and citation success?," ECON - Working Papers 111, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    12. Bruno S. Frey, "undated". "Knight Fever towards an Economics of Awards," IEW - Working Papers 239, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    13. Bruno S. Frey & Susanne Neckermann, 2013. "Prizes and awards," Chapters, in: Luigino Bruni & Stefano Zamagni (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Reciprocity and Social Enterprise, chapter 27, pages 271-276, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. V. Ginsburgh & Sheila Weyers, 2014. "Nominees, winners, and losers," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 38(4), pages 291-313, November.
    15. Andrés González-Moralejo, S & Compés López, R, 2009. "Problemas contractuales y acuerdos de subcontratación: El caso de la logística frigorífica en la industria alimentaria valenciana/," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 27, pages 279(30á)-27, Abril.
    16. Franklin G. Mixon & Benno Torgler & Kamal P. Upadhyaya, 2017. "Scholarly impact and the timing of major awards in economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1837-1852, September.
    17. Ho Fai Chan & Bruno S. Frey & Jana Gallus & Benno Torgler, 2013. "Does the John Bates Clark Medal boost subsequent productivity and citation success?," ECON - Working Papers 111, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    18. Ponzo, Michela & Scoppa, Vincenzo, 2023. "Famous after death: The effect of a writer's death on book sales," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 210-225.
    19. Chan, Ho Fai & Frey, Bruno S. & Gallus, Jana & Torgler, Benno, 2014. "Academic honors and performance," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 188-204.
    20. Henry Aray, 2021. "Oscar awards and foreign language film production: evidence for a panel of countries," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 45(3), pages 435-457, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jculte:v:48:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10824-023-09488-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.