IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aep/anales/4318.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

¿Cuál es el alcance de la revolución de la credibilidad?

Author

Listed:
  • Juan Andrés Cabral
  • Florencia Iara Pucci

Abstract

En los últimos 25 años ha tenido lugar un cambio abrupto en la metodología seguida por los economistas. Autores como Angrist y Pischke llaman a este cambio “revolución de la credibilidad”. Esta revolución consta del uso de métodos experimentales o cuasi-experimentales y alcanzó principalmente a las revistas académicas de alto impacto de Economía tales como The Quarterly Journal of Economics, American Economic Review y Econometrica, entre otras. Hasta el momento no se ha analizado el alcance de la revolución en revistas académicas asociadas a corrientes heterodoxas. El objetivo de este artículo es explorar con un análisis bibliométrico si hubo un cambio similar en revistas con principal influencia de las corrientes marxista, austríaca y post-keynesiana. El resultado de este ejercicio sugiere que este tipo de revistas no presenció una revolución de la credibilidad como tal.

Suggested Citation

  • Juan Andrés Cabral & Florencia Iara Pucci, 2020. "¿Cuál es el alcance de la revolución de la credibilidad?," Asociación Argentina de Economía Política: Working Papers 4318, Asociación Argentina de Economía Política.
    • Handle: RePEc:aep:anales:4318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://aaep.org.ar/works/works2020/Cabral.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matthew T. Panhans & John D. Singleton, 2015. "The Empirical Economist's Toolkit: From Models to Methods," Center for the History of Political Economy Working Paper Series 2015-3, Center for the History of Political Economy.
    2. Ehrlich, Isaac, 1975. "The Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment: A Question of Life and Death," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(3), pages 397-417, June.
    3. Thelwall, Mike, 2018. "Dimensions: A competitor to Scopus and the Web of Science?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 430-435.
    4. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2013. "Six Decades of Top Economics Publishing: Who and How?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(1), pages 162-172, March.
    5. Marc Lavoie, 2009. "Introduction to Post-Keynesian Economics," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-0-230-23548-9, December.
    6. Martin Ravallion, 2018. "Should the Randomistas (Continue to) Rule?," Working Papers 492, Center for Global Development, revised 17 Jan 2019.
    7. Backhouse, Roger E., 2000. "Progress in Heterodox Economics," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 149-155, June.
    8. Coats, A. W. Bob & Backhouse, Roger E. & Dow, Sheila C. & Fusfeld, Daniel R. & Goodwin, Craufurd D. & Rutherford, Malcolm, 2000. "Roundtable: The Progress of Heterodox Economics," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 145-148, June.
    9. Anne-Wil Harzing, 2019. "Two new kids on the block: How do Crossref and Dimensions compare with Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus and the Web of Science?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(1), pages 341-349, July.
    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. Vivek Kumar Singh & Prashasti Singh & Mousumi Karmakar & Jacqueline Leta & Philipp Mayr, 2021. "The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5113-5142, June.
    2. Thiago Dumont Oliveira & Marwil J. Dávila-Fernández, 2020. "From modelmania to datanomics? The rise of mathematical and quantitative methods in three top economics journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 51-70, April.
    3. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2017. "Undergraduate Econometrics Instruction: Through Our Classes, Darkly," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 125-144, Spring.
    4. Sandra T. Silva & Isabel Mota & Filipe Grilo, 2015. "The use of game theory in regional economics: A quantitative retrospective," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94(2), pages 421-441, June.
    5. Hunter Bennett & Flynn Slattery, 2023. "Graphical abstracts are associated with greater Altmetric attention scores, but not citations, in sport science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3793-3804, June.
    6. José Edwards & Yann Giraud & Christophe Schinckus, 2018. "A quantitative turn in the historiography of economics?," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(4), pages 283-290, October.
    7. Xu, Fang & Ou, Guiyan & Ma, Tingcan & Wang, Xianwen, 2021. "The consistency of impact of preprints and their journal publications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    8. Michel De Vroey & Luca Pensieroso, 2016. "The Rise of a Mainstream in Economics," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2016026, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    9. Josh Angrist & Pierre Azoulay & Glenn Ellison & Ryan Hill & Susan Feng Lu, 2020. "Inside Job or Deep Impact? Extramural Citations and the Influence of Economic Scholarship," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(1), pages 3-52, March.
    10. Michele Di Maio, 2013. "Are Mainstream and Heterodox Economists Different? An Empirical Analysis," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(5), pages 1315-1348, November.
    11. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    12. Duarte N. Leite & Sandra T. Silva & Oscar Afonso, 2014. "Institutions, Economics And The Development Quest," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 491-515, July.
    13. Joshua Angrist & Pierre Azoulay & Glenn Ellison & Ryan Hill & Susan Feng Lu, 2017. "Inside Job or Deep Impact? Using Extramural Citations to Assess Economic Scholarship," NBER Working Papers 23698, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Robert Lepenies, 2014. "Economists as political philosophers : a critique of normative trade theory," RSCAS Working Papers 2014/11, European University Institute.
    15. Sheila C. Dow, 2012. "Variety of Methodological Approach in Economics," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Foundations for New Economic Thinking, chapter 13, pages 210-230, Palgrave Macmillan.
    16. Stephan Stahlschmidt & Dimity Stephen, 2022. "From indexation policies through citation networks to normalized citation impacts: Web of Science, Scopus, and Dimensions as varying resonance chambers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2413-2431, May.
    17. Alberto Martín-Martín & Mike Thelwall & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2021. "Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 871-906, January.
    18. Philip J. Purnell, 2021. "Conference proceedings publications in bibliographic databases: a case study of countries in Southeast Asia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 355-387, January.
    19. Óscar Carpintero, 2013. "When Heterodoxy Becomes Orthodoxy: Ecological Economics in The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(5), pages 1287-1314, November.
    20. Kronenberg, Tobias, 2010. "Finding common ground between ecological economics and post-Keynesian economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1488-1494, May.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology
    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:aep:anales:4318. 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: Juan Manuel Quintero (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeppea.html .

    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.