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

Nattavudh Powdthavee*, Yohanes E. Riyanto, Jack L. Knetsch

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

24 Citations (Scopus)

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 languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)33-44
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Economic Psychology
Volume66
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2018
Externally publishedYes

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

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Lower-rated publications do lower academics’ judgments of publication lists: Evidence from a survey experiment of economists'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this