Abstract
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.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 33-44 |
Number of pages | 12 |
Journal | Journal of Economic Psychology |
Volume | 66 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Jun 2018 |
Externally published | Yes |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2018 Elsevier B.V.
ASJC Scopus Subject Areas
- Applied Psychology
- Sociology and Political Science
- Economics and Econometrics
Keywords
- Judgment bias
- Less-is-better effect
- Lower ranked journals
- Publication