IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/revind/v17y2000i4p371-384.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Economic Journals Obey Economic Prescriptions?

Author

Listed:
  • Craig Freeman

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Craig Freeman, 2000. "Do Economic Journals Obey Economic Prescriptions?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 17(4), pages 371-384, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:revind:v:17:y:2000:i:4:p:371-384
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1007898402413
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1007898402413
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1007898402413?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. David N. Laband, 1990. "Is There Value-Added from the Review Process in Economics?: Preliminary Evidence from Authors," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 105(2), pages 341-352.
    2. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 1994. "Facts and Myths about Refereeing," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 153-163, Winter.
    3. Masahiko Aoki, 2013. "Toward an Economic Model of the Japanese Firm," Chapters, in: Comparative Institutional Analysis, chapter 18, pages 315-341, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Akerlof, George A, 1991. "Procrastination and Obedience," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(2), pages 1-19, May.
    5. Joshua S. Gans & George B. Shepherd, 1994. "How Are the Mighty Fallen: Rejected Classic Articles by Leading Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 165-179, Winter.
    6. Lazear, Edward P, 1993. "The Economics of Professional Etiquette: Discussion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 1-44, May.
    7. H. Peyton Young, 1996. "The Economics of Convention," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(2), pages 105-122, Spring.
    8. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 1992. "The Young Economist's Guide to Professional Etiquette," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 169-179, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mirucki, Jean, 2009. "Assessing trends in editorial preferences towards industrial organization article," MPRA Paper 30406, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Dec 2009.
    2. Mirucki, Jean, 2009. "Assessing trends in editorial preferences towards 'Industrial Organization' articles: 1991-2000," MPRA Paper 31168, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Dec 2009.
    3. Mirucki, Jean, 2007. "Visibilité des contributions en économie industrielle dans les revues scientifiques internationales [Visibility of contributions in Industrial Organization in international scientific journals]," MPRA Paper 31688, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Jun 2007.

    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. John Creedy, 2005. "From Manuscript to Publication : A Brief Guide for Economists," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 934, The University of Melbourne.
    2. Bruno Frey, 2005. "Problems with Publishing: Existing State and Solutions," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 173-190, April.
    3. Ofer H. Azar, 2006. "The Academic Review Process: How Can We Make it More Efficient?," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 50(1), pages 37-50, March.
    4. Ruth Ben-Yashar & Shmuel Nitzan, 2001. "Are Referees Sufficiently Informed About The Editor'S Practice?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 1-11, August.
    5. Bruno S. Frey, "undated". "Publishing as Prostitution? Choosing Between One�s Own Ideas and Academic Failure," IEW - Working Papers 117, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    6. Hendrik P. van Dalen & K?ne Henkens, 2005. "Signals in science - On the importance of signaling in gaining attention in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 64(2), pages 209-233, August.
    7. Steven M. Shugan, 2002. "The Mission of Marketing Science," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 1-13.
    8. Marshall H. Medoff, 2003. "Editorial Favoritism in Economics?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(2), pages 425-434, October.
    9. Ofer Azar, 2003. "Rejections and the Importance of First Response Times (Or: How Many Rejections Do Others Receive?)," General Economics and Teaching 0309002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Steven M. Shugan, 2007. "The Editor's Secrets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 589-595, 09-10.
    11. David J. Pannell, 2002. "Prose, Psychopaths and Persistence: Personal Perspectives on Publishing," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 50(2), pages 101-115, July.
    12. Azar, Ofer H., 2008. "Evolution of social norms with heterogeneous preferences: A general model and an application to the academic review process," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(3-4), pages 420-435, March.
    13. Glenn Ellison, 2002. "The Slowdown of the Economics Publishing Process," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(5), pages 947-993, October.
    14. KRAPF, Matthias & SCHLÄPFER, Jörg, 2012. "How Nobel Laureates Would Perform In The Handelsblatt Ranking," Regional and Sectoral Economic Studies, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 12(3).
    15. Hadavand, Aboozar & Hamermesh, Daniel S. & Wilson, Wesley W., 2019. "Is Scholarly Refereeing Productive (at the Margin)?," IZA Discussion Papers 12866, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Rose, Michael E. & Opolot, Daniel C. & Georg, Co-Pierre, 2022. "Discussants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    17. Justus Haucap & Nima Moshgbar & W. Benedikt Schmal, 2021. "The impact of the German 'DEAL' on competition in the academic publishing market," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(8), pages 2027-2049, December.
    18. Krishna Muniyoor, 2022. "The Structure of Scholarly Publishing: a Case of Economics Research in India," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(3), pages 1801-1818, September.
    19. Hofmeister Robert & Krapf Matthias, 2011. "How Do Editors Select Papers, and How Good are They at Doing It?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-23, October.
    20. Chris Doucouliagos & T.D. Stanley, 2013. "Are All Economic Facts Greatly Exaggerated? Theory Competition And Selectivity," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 316-339, April.

    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:revind:v:17:y:2000:i:4:p:371-384. 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.