Critiques, Ethics, Prestige and Status: A Survey of Editors in Economics

Abstract

This study examines survey data on the views of editors of economics journals on common critiques of the discipline, ethics and editorial practices, and the role of prestige and status in publishing. We utilize an ordered probit model to investigate whether editors or journal characteristics are systematically related to editors’ views, controlling for gender and editorial position. Regression results show that editors from top-ranked journals are less likely to agree with common disciplinary critiques, more likely to support market solutions and less likely to agree with concerns about editorial practices.

Expedited editorial decision in COVID-19 pandemic

“…Seemingly arguable but truly precedented, social science journals prefer editors of high prestige and reputation ( Hodgson & Rothman, 1999 ). A recent survey of editors in economics ( May et al, 2021 ) suggests the editors higher in status imply a higher bar in publishing and serve as better “gatekeepers” of social science research. Relatively speaking, science editors keep their fingers on the pulse of science and more emphasize the novelty of research ( Tenopir et al, 2016 ).…”