IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/3rcdn.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How has Mainstream changed? A Topic Model insight

Author

Listed:
  • Redigonda, Margherita

Abstract

This paper has two aims: to explore the suitability of computational tools in order to get a description of long-term evolution of mainstream economics and to test the "mainstream pluralism" hypothesis. A topic model is developed using full-text from papers published in a sample of top economics journals and the hierarchical Stochastic Block Model algorithm. The model is able to replicate many qualitative facts about the history of mainstream economics. Finally, the reason of the failure to test for the "mainstream pluralism" hypothesis are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Redigonda, Margherita, 2023. "How has Mainstream changed? A Topic Model insight," OSF Preprints 3rcdn, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:3rcdn
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/3rcdn
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6575fa8874f3611cb82e4482/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/3rcdn?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean Heck & Peter Zaleski, 2006. "The most frequent contributors to the elite economics journals: Half century of contributions to the “Blue ribbon eight”," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 30(1), pages 1-37, March.
    2. Malouin, Jean-Louis & -Francois Outreville, J., 1987. "The relative impact of economics journals: A cross-country survey and comparison," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 267-277, August.
    3. William J. Moore, 1972. "The Relative Quality Of Economics Journals: A Suggested Rating System," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 10(2), pages 156-169, June.
    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. Wohlrabe, Klaus, 2016. "Taking the Temperature: A Meta-Ranking of Economics Journals," MPRA Paper 68933, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Redigonda, Margherita, 2023. "How has Mainstream changed? A Topic Model insight," OSF Preprints 3rcdn_v1, Center for Open Science.
    3. Lutz Bornmann & Alexander Butz & Klaus Wohlrabe, 2018. "What are the top five journals in economics? A new meta-ranking," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(6), pages 659-675, February.
    4. David Figlio, 1994. "Trends in the Publication of Empirical Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 179-187, Summer.
    5. Pontille, David & Torny, Didier, 2010. "Revues qui comptent, revues qu’on compte :produire des classements en économie et gestion," Revue de la Régulation - Capitalisme, institutions, pouvoirs, Association Recherche et Régulation, vol. 8.
    6. David Laband & John Sophocleus, 1985. "Revealed preference for economics journals: Citations as dollar votes," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 317-324, January.
    7. James B. Davies & Martin G. Kocher & Matthias Sutter, 2008. "Economics research in Canada: a long‐run assessment of journal publications," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(1), pages 22-45, February.
    8. Kenneth J. Button, 1981. "The Economic Analysis of Economic Literature: A Survey," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 25(2), pages 36-43, October.
    9. Sandra Rousseau, 2008. "Journal evaluation by environmental and resource economists: A survey," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 77(2), pages 223-233, November.
    10. Atal, Vidya, 2010. "Do journals accept too many papers?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 229-232, May.
    11. Miller, James C, III & Tollison, Robert D, 1975. "Rates of Publication per Faculty Member in Forty-Five "Rated" Economics Departments," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 13(1), pages 122-123, March.
    12. Michael Bräuninger & Justus Haucap, 2003. "Reputation and Relevance of Economics Journals," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 175-197, May.
    13. Mirucki, Jean & Nicot, Bernadette & Poshyvak, Maria, 2007. "What Can EconLit Reveal Us About Ukraine's Scholarly Production?," MPRA Paper 29089, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Kam Chan & Carl Chen & Louis Cheng, 2005. "Ranking Research Productivity in Accounting for Asia-Pacific Universities," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 47-64, January.
    15. Pedro Cosme Vieira & Aurora A. C. Teixeira, 2010. "Are finance, management, and marketing autonomous fields of scientific research? An analysis based on journal citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(3), pages 627-646, December.
    16. Axel Schlinghoff & Uschi Backes-Gellner, 2002. "Publikationsindikatoren und die Stabilität wirtschaftswissenschaftlicher Zeitschriftenrankings," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 54(4), pages 343-362, June.
    17. Rodney H. Mabry & Arthur D. Sharplin, 1985. "The Relative Importance Of Journals Used In Finance Research," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 8(4), pages 287-296, December.
    18. Kam Chan & Carl Chen & Louis Cheng, 2006. "A ranking of accounting research output in the European region," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 3-17.
    19. Marshall H. Medoff, 2003. "Editorial Favoritism in Economics?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(2), pages 425-434, October.
    20. Timothy D. Fry & Joan M. Donohue, 2014. "Exploring the Author Affiliation Index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 1647-1667, March.

    More about this item

    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:osf:osfxxx:3rcdn. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.