well this is meta:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jcpy.1047
we fear losing one of the most widely-accepted tenets of human behavior, not to mention retracting Nobels for Kahneman/Tversky, so we ignore the tsunami of empirical evidence to the contrary
Would you?
How does it rank vis a vis Economica ?
Any experience/comments about grammarly.com
Top 100 of all journals (AER #47, only econ/finence journal in top 100):
https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=top_venues
Business/Econ sub-category:
https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=top_venues&hl=en&vq=bus
I am starting this new thread because the one previously started is misleading, it includes journals from different fields.
This is meant to provide some rough guidance to those who try to decide where to submit; for all other purposes: PLEASE READ PAPERS :-)
So this is the right link:
https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=top_venues&hl=en&vq=bus_economics
This is way more reasonable. Good to see JIE, JME, JDE, JPubE, JLE hang in there.
The good rule of thumb is:
Top 5 > Top field >= top of second-tier general journals
(depending on field and on which second-tier journal we are talking about)
ReStat and EJ very strong (JEEA also but a bit less): good, the profession needs more good general journals.
Speaking of this, below is the rest of the ranking, incomplete and subjective as it consists only of journals I manually searched and they tend to be general or in Macro/International although not only.
Some observations (subject to the disclaimer above):
*The EER is clearly better than the rest of general journals, although not at the same level as the other second-tier.
*The third-tier general journals are rather clearly Ec Inquiry, IER, Econ Letter, SJE, OEP, CJE; Economica is further down.
*In Macro: JMCB and JEDC still dominate RED although only marginally: they are all second-tier Macro; Quant Econ very disappointing (despite what commonly believed, somewhere between SJE and OEP ....).
*Third-tier Macro would be IJCB, J Macro, IMF Ec Rev and only then Quant Econ and Macro Dynamics
*In Theory, JET is still the top journal (one could say it is a general journal); then come TE and GEB
Hope this can be useful to somebody and please remember to read papers.
Ranking beyond top 20:
Journal of Econometrics 53 69
European Economic Review 48 65
Journal of Applied Econometrics 53 69
Journal of Money Credit and Banking 42 67
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 41 64
Economic Letters 41 55
Review of Economic Dynamics 40 62
Journal of Economic Theory 40 50
Economic Inquiry 37 53
RAND journal 35 58
International Journal of Central Banking 34 63
Theoretical Economics 34 60
Games and Economic Behavior 34 45
Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 33 57
International Economic Review 32 58
Journal of Macroeconomics 32 39
IMF Economic Review 30 61
Scandinavian Journal of Economics 30 45
Quantitative Economics 27 38
Oxford Economic Papers 26 42
Canadian Journal of Economics 24 40
Economica 23 36
Macroeconomic Dynamics 23 35
(12) The Research Productivity of New PhDs in Economics: The Surprisingly High Non-success of the Successful
John P. Conley and Ali Sina Onder
We study the research productivity of new graduates from North American PhD programs in economics from 1986 to 2000. We find that research productivity drops off very quickly with class rank at all departments, and that the rank of the graduate departments themselves provides a surprisingly poor prediction of future research success. For example, at the top ten departments as a group, the median graduate has fewer than 0.03 American Economic Review (AER)-equivalent publications at year six after graduation, an untenurable record almost anywhere. We also find that PhD graduates of equal percentile rank from certain lower-ranked departments have stronger publication records than their counterparts at higher-ranked departments. In our data, for example, Carnegie Mellon' s graduates at the 85th percentile of year-six research productivity outperform 85th percentile graduates of the University of Chicago, the University of Pennsylvania, Stanford, and Berkeley. These results suggest that even the top departments are not doing a very good job of training the great majority of their students to be successful research economists. Hiring committees may find these results helpful when trying to balance class rank and place of graduate in evaluating job candidates, and current graduate students may wish to re-evaluate their academic strategies in light of these findings.
Top 5: QJE, JPE, AER, RESTUD, ECMA
Top 10: T5, AEJM, RESTAT, AEJA, JME, JF
How can anyone argue with these rankings?
Please help me. Any suggestions?
?
"AEA Editor Transitions. The AEA Executive Committee is pleased to announce three new editor appointments: Esther Duflo for the American Economic Review, Alexandre Mas for the American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, and Johannes Hörner for the American Economic Journal: Microeconomics. The new editors will begin in January 2017. We wish to thank our outgoing Editors Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg, Esther Duflo and Andrew Postlewaite for their outstanding efforts devoted to making the AEA journals among the most respected scholarly journals in economics."
GOD NO. Is this the recognition paid to a completely clubby and agenda-driven editor who used the AEJ to publish special issues for her and her close family and friends? Is the AER now the land of RCT drones who have little idea about economics? This is very bad.
Which one is the most reputable in the list above? Looking for a decent outlet for my paper. Rejected at jfqa and rof.
What is the acceptance rate and turnaround? Quality of reviews?
If I am not working anywhere and graduated long time ago, what should/can I put as an affiliation on the paper? (Ps: The reason that I am not working is political, the government keeps me in an "open-air" jail, but I am MRM researcher.)
Which one is more prestigious
What's the etiquette for acknowledgements? Do you thank everyone that you asked for comments? Or everyone that put effort into their answer? Or only those that actually made a contribution with their comment? Does it make any difference, what kind of article it is (i.e. whether/where it's supposed to be published)?
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2790606
Spends the majority of the paper defending behavioural economics against critiques that were formulated in the 1970s (e.g. relating to neglect of incentives and opportunities for social learning).
By far the most prominent critique of the heuristics and biases tradition / behavioural econ has come from Gigerenzer's camp since the late 80s. Not a single word or reference is made to this.
What an intellectually dishonest, self-congratulating piece of sh*t.
AER is corrupt.
Haven’t archeologists already shown the link between roads and development?
Hey Bros.
Got a paper evaluating the global economic impact of a proposed US policy reform in a giant, precisely calibrated, computable general equilibrium model. It's a hot reform, and this is the first paper being written with the model.
What would be a good outlet for the paper? I've gotten desk rejected from JPubE in the past with similar work.
What do people think of the practice of indicating student authors on CVs, often by an asterisk next to their names in lists of coauthors?
As in:
Paper title (with Bob Smith* and Ramit Agarwal)
* Supervised graduate student coauthors
Seems to be more common in non-alphabetical ordered fields.