Editorial Favoritism in Economics?

Southern Economic Journal

Volumn 70, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 425-434

  Medoff, Marshall H ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0242382091     PISSN: 00384038     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3648979     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. Blank, Rebecca M. 1991. The effects of double-blind versus single-blind reviewing: Evidence from the American Economic Review. American Economic Review 81:1041-67.
2. David, Paul A. 1994. Positive feedbacks and research productivity in science: Reopening another black box. In Economics of technology, edited by Ove Granstrand. New York: North-Holland, pp. 65-89.
3. Diamond, Arthur M. 1989. The core journals of economics. Current Contents 21:4-11.
4. Folster, S. 1995. The perils of peer review in economics and other sciences. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 5:43-57.
5. Gans, Joshua S., and George B. Shepherd. 1994. How are the mighty fallen: Rejected classic articles by leading economists. Journal of Economic Perspectives 8:165-79.
6. Greene, William H. 1993. Econometric analysis 2. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
7. Hamermesh, Daniel S. 1994. Facts and myths about refereeing. Journal of Economic Perspectives 8:153-63.
8. Hamermesh, Daniel S., and Sharon M. Oster. 2002. Tools or toys? The impact of high technology on scholarly productivity. Economic Inquiry 40:539-55.
9. Hawkins, Robert G., Lawrence S. Ritter, and Ingo Walter. 1973. What economists think of their journals. Journal of Political Economy 81:1017-32.
10. Laband, David N. 1986. Article popularity. Economic Inquiry 24:173-80.
11. Laband, David N. 1990. Is there value-added from the review process in economics?: Preliminary evidence from authors. Quarterly Journal of Economics 105:341-52.
12. Laband, David N., and Michael J. Piette. 1994a. Favoritism versus search for good papers: Empirical evidence regarding the behavior of journal editors. Journal of Political Economy 102:194-203.
13. Laband, David N., and Michael J. Piette. 1994b. The relative impacts of economics journals: 1970-1990. Journal of Economic Literature 32:640-66.
14. Leibowitz, Stanley J., and John P. Palmer. 1988. Assessing assessments of the relative quality of economics departments. Quarterly Review of Economics and Business 28:77-88.
15. Mackie, Christopher D. 1998. Canonizing economic theory. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
16. Merton, Robert K. 1968. The Matthew effect in science. Science 159:56-63.
17. Moore, William J. 1972. The relative quality of economics journals: A suggested rating system. Western Economic Journal 10:156-69.
18. Sauer, Raymond D. 1988. Estimates of the returns to quality and coauthorship in economic academics. Journal of Political Economy 96:855-66.
19. Shepherd, George B. 1995. Rejected: Leading economists ponder the publication process. Sun Lakes, AZ: Thomas Horton.
20. Siow, Aloysius. 1991. Are first impressions important in academia? Journal of Human Resources 26:236-55.
21. Stigler, George J., and Claire Friedland. 1975. The citation practices of doctorates in economics. Journal of Political Economy 83:477-507.