Lower-rated publications do lower academics’ judgments of publication lists: Evidence from a survey experiment of economists

Citation data:

Journal of Economic Psychology, ISSN: 0167-4870, Vol: 66, Page: 33-44

Publication Year:
2018
Captures 7
Readers 7
Mentions 2
Blog Mentions 2
Social Media 1554
Tweets 953
Shares, Likes & Comments 601
DOI:
10.1016/j.joep.2018.04.003
Author(s):
Nattavudh Powdthavee; Yohanes E. Riyanto; Jack L. Knetsch
Publisher(s):
Elsevier BV
Tags:
Social Sciences; Psychology; Economics, Econometrics and Finance
Most Recent Tweet View All Tweets
Most Recent Blog Mention
article description
Publications in leading journals are widely known to have a positive impact on economists’ judgments of the value of authors’ contributions and professional reputations. While conjectures that publications in lower-rated journals likely have a negative impact on such judgments are common, there have been virtually no direct tests of their validity. Our intent is to provide results from such a test, one that involved asking economists from 44 universities throughout the world to rate either a publication list with only higher-rated journals or a list with all of these but with additional publications in lower-rated journals. Our primary finding was that, holding other things constant, adding publications in lower-rated journals to what is typically considered a good publication record does have a significant negative impact on economists’ judgments of the value of the author’s contribution. Most implications of this bias suggest negative impacts on social welfare.