Citation success over time: theory or empirics?

Johnston, David W.; Piatti, Marco; Torgler, Benno

doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0910-7

Cited by 34 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 11 publications

(3 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Glänzel (2008) and Glänzel et al (2009) recommend using a citation window of at least three years. Johnston et al (2013) show for papers published in the American Economic Review that the mean citation rate peaks in the fourth year after publication. Since the Acknowledgements Open access funding provided by Max Planck Society.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Normalisation of citation impact in economics

Bornmann

Wohlrabe

2019

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study is intended to facilitate fair research evaluations in economics. Field-and timenormalisation of citation impact is the standard method in bibliometrics. Since citation rates for journal papers differ substantially across publication years and Journal of Economic Literature classification codes, citation rates should be normalised for the comparison of papers across different time periods and economic subfields. Without normalisation, both factors that are independent of research quality might lead to misleading results of citation analyses. We apply two normalised indicators in economics, which are the most important indicators in bibliometrics: (1) the mean normalised citation score (MNCS) compares the citation impact of a focal paper with the mean impact of similar papers published in the same economic subfield and publication year. (2) PP top 10 % is the share of papers that belong to the 10% most cited papers in a certain subfield and time period. Since the MNCS is based on arithmetic averages despite skewed citation distributions, we recommend using PP top 10 % for fair comparisons of entities in economics. In this study, we apply the normalisation methods to 294 journals (including normalised scores for 192,524 papers). We used the PP top 10 % results for assigning the journals to four citation impact classes. Seventeen journals have been identified as outstandingly cited. Two journals, Quarterly Journal of Economics and Journal of Economic Literature, perform statistically significantly better than all other journals. Thus, only two journals can be clearly separated from the rest in economics.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Normalisation of citation impact in economics

Bornmann

Wohlrabe

2019

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We were also unable to distinguish self-citations, a distinction that might improve the relevance of the results. For example, Johnston et al (2013) note that although some argue that self-citation is selfserving, others believe it is central to the progression of scientific communication. There is also evidence that self-citation has no significant quantitative effect on the total number of citations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The inner quality of an article: Will time tell?

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we assess whether quality survives the test of time in academia by comparing up to 80 years of academic journal article citations from two top journals, Econometrica and the American Economic Review. The research setting under analysis is analogous to a controlled real world experiment in that it involves a homogeneous task (trying to publish in top journals) by individuals with a homogenous job profile (academics) in a specific research environment (economics and econometrics). Comparing articles published concurrently in the same outlet at the same time (same issue) indicates that symbolic capital or power due to institutional affiliation or connection does seem to boost citation success at the beginning, giving those educated at or affiliated with leading universities an initial comparative advantage. Such advantage, however, does not hold in the long run: at a later stage, the publications of other researchers become as or even more successful.

show abstract

“…From the 1980s, a clear divergence has occurred with average citations for the ER rising at a faster pace than for the AEP, resulting in the ER having consistently higher citation rates for both applied and theoretical articles. Similarly, since the 1980s applied contributions have attracted higher average citations than theoretical ones for both journals, consistent with the pattern of citations identified for the American Economic Review (Johnston et al ., ). When comparing the dry holes for the AEP and ER , see Table , the AEP' s performance lags behind the ER 's – especially for theoretical contributions.…”

Section: An Empirical Audit Of Australian Economic Papers 1962–2010mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Tale of Two Australian Economics Journals

Millmow

Tuck

2014

J of App Econs and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adelaide has made a significant contribution to Australian economics. Since 1966, the University of Adelaide and Flinders University have been the partners behind the journal Australian Economic Papers (AEP). It has been an adventurous undertaking sometimes disconcerted by financial vulnerability, which at times, threatened its very existence. After outlining the journal's history, this paper undertakes a forensic examination of the AEP, and provides a comparison with its most obvious competitor, The Economic Record (ER). Despite its bold ambitions, we find that the AEP is now Australia's second‐ranking generalist economics journal and suffering the fate of being of that genre.

show abstract

Citation success over time: theory or empirics?

Cited by 34 publications

References 11 publications

Normalisation of citation impact in economics

Normalisation of citation impact in economics

The inner quality of an article: Will time tell?

A Tale of Two Australian Economics Journals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About