The micro-geography of academic research: How distinctive is economics?

This study examines micro-geographic clustering in the production and recognition of academic research. Three U.S. ZIP codes are associated with over 40 percent of articles in the top five economics journals and those articles garnered one-half of all citations in these journals from 2000 to 2015. Such micro-geographic concentration is not apparent in other disciplines, even those like chemistry that rely on specialized laboratories. Concentration of citations to economics articles whose authors are associated with a few key ZIP codes has strengthened over time, even as it has weakened for other disciplines. This micro-geographic concentration may increase systemic risk by reducing the diversity of economics research that is published and cited and may lead to insufficient research attention to local context.     

The Institutional Concentration of Authors in Top Journals of Economics During the Last Two Decades

This paper addresses the institutional concentration of authors in 15 top economics journals from 1977 to 1997. The concentration of authors' PhD affiliations is substantially higher than the concentration of authors' current affiliations. Relating input indicators, such as population, number of universities with economics departments, or manpower in economics, to publication output reduces the US dominance considerably, whereas Israel and the United Kingdom come out excellently. Exporters and importers of PhDs among universities are identified. Concentration ratios like the Herfindahl-Index lack a clear time trend. Nevertheless, the position of the United States has been weakening in recent years.     

The state of research on technological uncertainties, social uncertainties and emerging markets: A multidisciplinary literature review

The objective of this research work is to study the progress of research on technological uncertainties, social uncertainties and emerging markets and outline and identify the key disciplines, journals, articles and authors. For this the author studied the existing literature from the various fields in which technological uncertainties, social uncertainties and emerging markets research work have been published using ISI Web of Knowledge database. The paper finds that there is increasing research work on technological uncertainties, social uncertainties and emerging markets and the bibliographical search resulted in ninety-one documents written by one-hundred-sixty-one authors in eighty-four journals in seventy-two disciplines. The five major disciplines and their underlying journals are business and economics, agriculture, psychology, public administration, and environmental sciences and ecology accounting for majority of publications. In journals the most prolific, measured by number of articles published are Harvard Business Review, Social Science and Medicine, World Development, and Higher Education; and most influential, measured by the global citation received, are Harvard Business Review, Social Science and Medicine and Sociological Review. The top 10% of the journals are responsible for 23% of all publications but 85% of all global citations received. This highlights that despite the high, diverse and increasing number of journals; only few are dominating and shaping the research arena of technological uncertainties, social uncertainties and emerging markets. Further, in the ten most cited articles, no author appears more than once.     

Ranking Journals Following a Matching Model Approach: An Application to Public Economics Journals

Journal rankings based on citation indexes are widely used in the economics field. This paper proposes an alternative way to rank journals based on the publishing behavior of top‐ranked authors. I justify this approach by depicting the scientific publishing market as following a matching process. Compared with the citation approach, the methodology that we propose has advantages in terms of time effort to produce national and subdiscipline rankings. It also corrects the impact underestimation that the citation approach tends to produce in new and re‐founded journals. This paper proposes an empirical application to the case of public economics journals.     

The Editors and Authors of Economics Journals: a Case of Institutional Oligopoly?

This paper examines data on the institutional backgrounds of editors and authors of the top 30 economics journals, identified by their 1995 citation impact. It is revealed, for example, that 70.8% of the journal editors were located in the United States, and twelve U.S. universities accounted for the location of more than 38.9%. Concerning journal article authors, 65.7% were located in U.S. institutions and twelve U.S. universities accounted for 21.8%. Arguably, the degree of institutional and geographical concentration of editors and authors may be unhealthy for innovative research in economics.     

Do economics journal archives promote replicable research?

Abstract. All the long‐standing archives at economics journals do not facilitate the reproduction of published results. The data‐only archives at Journal of Business and Economic Statistics and Economic Journal fail in part because most authors do not contribute data. Results published in the FRB St. Louis Review can rarely be reproduced using the data+code in the journal archive. Recently created archives at top journals should avoid the mistakes of their predecessors. We categorize reasons for archives' failures and identify successful policies.     

Authorship,Collaboration, Topics,and Research Gaps in Environmental and Resource Economics 1991–2015

Environmental and Resource Economics is one of the premier journals in the field of environmental economics. It was established with an aspiration to focus more on applied and policy relevant research compared to other established journals, and to establish better channels of communication and collaboration between researchers from Europe and other parts of the world. We present a text based exploratory analysis of 1630 articles published in the Journal from 1991 to 2015 that suggests the Journal has been somewhat successful in meeting both these aims. Perhaps more importantly, it shows the Journal continues to progress toward these goals. The European authors are the largest contributors to the Journal, which is in contrast to other prominent journals (such as Journal of Environmental Economics and Management and Ecological Economics). And while most of the collaboration has occurred within this geographic region (e.g., European authors collaborated with other European authors more frequently), this trend appears to be changing as the proportion of articles written by international collaborators is gradually increasing. Topic analysis reveals that almost all of the articles could be grouped under applied and/or policy relevant topics, and almost two-thirds of the articles are empirical in nature, which suggest that the journal has been able to fulfil both of its commitments. We also investigate trends in research foci over the last 25 years and what kind of research gaps can be discerned.     

公私合作伙伴关系（PPP）的文献计量与可视化分析

为了解国内PPP领域的研究现状和发展趋势,以CNKI数据库（2000-2015）收录的相关期刊论文为数据来源,运用SATI3.2和UCINET6.0软件,针对期刊、作者、机构和关键词字段进行文献计量和可视化分析,着重对关键词进行了社会网络分析、聚类分析和多维尺度分析。通过上述研究,得到了反映该领域研究的知识图谱,并由此发现该领域的主流期刊、高水平机构、代表性学者、知识特征和研究趋势。     

Citations,journal ranking and multiple authorships: evidence based on the top 300 papers in economics

Two propositions are examined with reference to the top 300 papers in economics journals in terms of citations as reported by RePec. The results show that while there is significant correlation between the quality of a journal and the number of top papers published in that journal, the correlation is far away from being perfect. Furthermore, citations are not related to the number of authors, which provides evidence against the proposition that multi-authored papers are typically of higher quality than single-authored papers. The results also cast a shadow of doubt on the soundness of the bucket classification of journals.     

公司治理视角下企业创新研究脉络与热点图谱量化分析

为全面客观分析不同公司治理机制对企业创新的影响，基于Web of Science数据库2000-2019年463篇公司治理视角下企业创新研究文献，运用CiteSpace 软件绘制文献时空分布、双期刊叠加、文献共引及聚类、关键词时区等知识图谱，厘清研究分布情况、脉络轨迹及发展前沿。结果表明，文献数量逐年提高且尚未达到峰值，美国、中国为高产国家，该领域研究存在不同学科期刊间的知识流动。研究视角划分为创新决策动态视角、特定股权背景视角、委托代理视角，形成了以所有权结构、董事会职能及高管治理对企业创新影响为基础的研究主题框架，研究热点和前沿随公司治理主体关注重点变化和创新类别细化发生动态演进。最后，针对研究薄弱环节，提出未来研究方向。     

全球不信任研究文献计量分析与启示——基于Web of Science

文章采用文献计量分析方法,对发表于1918-2014年之间被Web of Science(即SCIE、SSCI和AHCI)收录的以"不信任"为主题的9938篇文献,从类型、年度发表情况、学科类别、研究领域、来源期刊统计、语种、国家与地区、机构、引用与被引用以及H指数进行统计分析;通过这一工作发现:不信任问题逐步成为包括心理学、哲学、社会学、经济学、法学、管理学、互联网科学、生理学等众多学科的学者关注和研究的热点以及焦点问题,发表在国外相关核心权威期刊的论文数逐年递增,专注不信任研究的学者(即发表论文多的学者)数量也不断增加,引用和被引用的文献数也逐年递增,不信任研究文献的H指数也不断提高;在不信任的研究领域中,针对在线信息、技术和商务系统方面的研究,呈现强劲的态势,McKnight研究团队占据研究的主导地位并且在电子商务不信任的研究中发挥引领作用,相关成果也较丰硕。文章的研究结果将为国内有关不信任研究尤其电子商务不信任研究提供借鉴和参考。     

Fifteen Years of Research on Graduate Education in Economics: What Have we Learned?

In this article, the authors summarize their 15 years of research on graduate education in economics in the United States. They examine all stages of the process, from the undergraduate origins of eventual economics PhDs to their attrition and time-to-degree outcomes. For PhD completers, the authors examine job market outcomes, research accomplishments, and career paths over the first five and 10 years of their careers.     

What are the top five journals in economics? A new meta-ranking

We construct a meta-ranking of 277 economics journals based on 22 different rankings. The ranking incorporates bibliometric indicators from four different databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, and RePEc). We account for the different scaling of the bibliometric indicators by standardizing each ranking score. We run a principal component analysis to assign weights to each ranking. In our meta-ranking, the top five journals are given by: Quarterly Journal of Economics, Journal of Financial Economics, Journal of Economic Literature (JEL), Journal of Finance, and Econometrica. Additionally, leaving out the JEL as a survey journal and the finance journals in our top 10 list we confirm the perceived top five journals in the economics profession.     

Teaching Methods in U.S. Undergraduate Economics Courses

In 1995 and 2000, the authors surveyed academic economists in the United States to establish how economics is taught in four types of undergraduate courses. The authors report overall findings from the 2000 survey and compare these results with the aggregate findings for respondents from all types of colleges and universities in the 1995 survey. The basic finding is that, despite some indications of increased emphasis and interest in teaching over this period, the teaching methods in these courses have changed very little over the past five years and are still dominated by “chalk and talk” classroom presentations.     

Power and publications in Chinese academia

In power-oriented societies, academia may not be immune to the influence of power. This paper studies the power-publication link by applying an event-study strategy to a panel dataset of the publication and biographical information of deans of economics schools in Chinese universities. We find that (i) deanship increases an individual's publication by 0.7 articles per year; (ii) the increased publications stem from work coauthored with other researchers within the same university; (iii) the topics of the increased publications are more likely to deviate from the deans’ research area prior to becoming deans; and (iv) the power effect is smaller for top universities and leading journals, and for scholars with more pre-dean publications. These patterns appear consistent with the role of power in resource allocation rather than the impact of ability or reputation of the deans and thus have implications on distortions in knowledge production.     

国际创新创业研究热点与趋势可视化分析

基于Web of Science数据库,借助知识图谱分析软件CiteSpace V,对国际四大顶级创业期刊近10年（2007-2016年）文献进行统计研究。运用共引、共词分析的突现值及图谱研究等方法,对创新创业领域的前沿热点、演化路径、研究趋势等进行分析,发现创新创业研究发文数量呈逐年增长趋势;从地域及机构分布来看,美国、英国、加拿大为创新创业研究高产国家;高产研究机构主要分布在美国、加拿大等国的大学和科研院所,机构前10名中美国占70%;高产作者分别是Shepherd DA、Wright M、Chrisman JJ、Webb JW、Baron RA等,他们大部分分布在高产机构中。研究热点由较为关注企业绩效、企业家才能、创新、洞察力等对创新创业发展的影响,逐渐转变为关注新经济背景下涌现的中小企业、新生企业的合法进入、机会识别等方面。     

On the divergence of evolutionary research paths in the past 50 years: a comprehensive bibliometric account

In the last two decades, there has been a noticeable increase in published research on evolutionary economics. The general perception is that formalization lags behind appreciative work. Notwithstanding, this general reading has yet to be supported by real data analysis. This work presents a survey on evolutionary economics, aimed at exploring the main research paths and contributions using bibliometric methods. The documentation is based on an extensive review of the abstracts from articles published in all economic journals over the past 50 years gathered from the Econlit database. Evolutionary contributions have apparently not converged to an integrated approach. Two rather extreme main research strands emerged: ‘History of Economic Thought and Methodology’ and ‘Games’. Whereas formal approaches have a reasonable and increasing share of published papers, purely empirical-related works are relatively scarce, representing a meagre and stagnant percentage of published works. This highlights the need to redirect the evolutionary research agenda.     

Institutional Inequality in the Publishing of Economics Papers, 1970-74

Both because of the importance of “getting published” and the difficulty of having one's work accepted by a professional journal, nearly every college teacher of economics should find this article to be of interest. Siegfried and Zak have analyzed the contributions to five leading journals in terms of the institutional affiliations of the authors, noting that “dramatic shifts in contributions among universities have occurred between the 1960s and the first half of the 1970s.” Some possible reasons for the change in the distribution of contributors are set forth. Detailed data are presented in six tables.     

Readings books and rankings of macromonetary articles,authors and journals

Articles republished in commercial readings books prove to be a feasible way to rank macromonetary articles, authors, and journals. Rankings are tested by discriminate analysis and by comparison to alternate rankings. Authors' fame is derived from their articles and from the journals in which their articles are published.