the number of published articles has doubled over the past decade
DESCRIPTION
The number of published articles has doubled over the past decade. It takes longer to produce a paper. Source: Kim, Morse and Zingales (2006). Electronic submissions have had an enormous impact. Revise-and-resubmit JF rejection rates, 2003-07. Journal folklore True or false?. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
The number of published articles has doubled over the past decade
It takes longer to produce a paper
Source: Kim, Morse and Zingales (2006)
Electronic submissions have had an enormous impact
Revise-and-resubmitJF rejection rates, 2003-07
Journal folkloreTrue or false?
• A publication in a bad journal has negative value.
• There is a “Rochester effect.”
• The RFS won’t publish corporate papers.
• Send a paper to the JFE first in order to get an assessment of its quality.
Sole authorship is disappearing
Source: Kim, Morse and Zingales (2006)
Co-authorship
• Co-authoring can lead to enormous collective action problems, but it almost always improves quality.
• Be careful of co-authoring with your advisor, or with someone of much higher stature. You’ll get no credit, or negative credit.
• However, having numerous co-authors is a positive signal of quality.
Selecting topics
• Try to be original. Study what no one else is studying.
• Take risks. Don’t write the nth paper on some topic; try to write the 1st.
• Pick topics that hold your own interest.
Impact: Publication counts
Source: Chung and Cox , JF (1990).
Impact: Citation counts
• 23% of all published articles receive 0 citations.
• The median number of citations per publication is 2.
• The 80-20 rule applies: the top 20% of papers receive 80% of the total citations.
Source: Ederington, JF (1979)
Details about citation counts
Source: Alexander and Mabry, JF (1994)
Impact: Recent trends(2008 data)
• H-index: h publications each with at least h citations.– 1. Shleifer (48)– 2. Barro (39)– 3. Tirole & Heckman (tied) (38)– 93. Fama (20)– 351. Jensen (13)
• SSRN downloads– 1. Jensen (355,533)– 2. Fama (247,853)– 3. Fernandez (155,799)– 25. Shleifer (52,539)
Changes in the refereeing process
• Heavier workloads / less quality control?
• More rounds
• Authors are rarely anonymous
Referee folklore(all somewhat true)
• You can disqualify someone as a referee by asking them for comments.
• Some referees get the same paper over and over again.
• You can appeal to the editor.
• Referees can save you from embarrassing mistakes.
What can we learn about referees?
Invest in becoming a good referee
• Build goodwill with the editor
• Impress the editor with your insight
• Impress the editor with your sense of fairness
• Sometimes the editor is more interested in reading your referee report than in reading the paper.
Where to submit?
How do you get promoted?
• Research quality– Quality ≠ quantity
• Teaching at an acceptable level
• Reputation and visibility– Campus seminar invitations– Major conference appearances
• Your referee is often in the audience• Good conference presentations lead to campus invitations
Strike while the iron is hot
Source: Kim, Morse and Zingales (2006)