out of my curiosity... Is it possible the submitted article "Under Review" with the status "EIC: Not Assigned". This is an exact situation of mine. Looks weird to me.
↧
Economist on "Be J of Macro status"
↧
Economist on "Vigdor STRONG"
Taking shots at publishing racket:
https://twitter.com/JakeVigdor/status/1075442585412370432?s=19
Taking shots at the AEA:
https://twitter.com/JakeVigdor/status/1075137718953201664?s=19
↧
↧
Economist on "Review of Development Economics or Journal of Comparative Economics"
Paper which could go either way, applications for development (trade opening) but also comp econ (institutions). Which is better for the CV?
↧
Economist on "Journal of international economics"
what does "submitted to the journal" mean? does it mean that an editor has been assigned? is it under review?
↧
Economist on "Has anyone ever made public stoopid referee reports that they received?"
If you know any webpage or something, please share. I am thinking about "name and shame" journal name + stoopid referee report list.
↧
↧
Economist on "Jde vs jhr"
Which one is better regarded in the profession? I have an education paper that fits in either these journals
↧
Economist on "Why AEJ Micro is so slow these days?"
They used to be pretty quick with around 2-3 month for two to three reviews. But these days they're more like 6-8 months! Why?
↧
Economist on "Never-Again journals"
Are there any journals where the editor has treated you so badly that you've decided never to submit there again, and to turn down referee requests? Is it a dangerous game to play?
↧
Economist on "Who Wants To Be An editor?"
Not me, that's for sure. For a while I was bummed that I didn't get invited to be an editor at journals where I published, but my friends who have editing responsibilities just constantly complain about how much time it takes, the hate mail they get from authors who have been rejected,
↧
↧
Economist on "Painful 2nd round referees"
Yesterday, for a top-field journal, we just bumped into one of those who love to come up with new (additional) robustness checks, with further changes to the structure of the manuscript, who still find that the motivation for the manuscript is not strong enough to be convincing (whatever that means?). Obviously, after a long and tedious first-round R&R (recommended by both referees) that took three co-authors 4 months of our time available for research. Obviously, after the other referee signed off without any further requests after the responses and changes we made. Obviously, because we couldn't make all the changes that the referee asked for in exactly the way the referee wanted them (but, 80/90% of that seemed not enough).
What is wrong with this profession? Why is it that so many people take this megalomaniac and tyrannical attitude as referees?
Anyway, hopefully it's not the majority of us who need to bring things to 3rd or 4th round, until they are pleased with the outcome, exactly as they wanted it.
↧
Economist on "Acceptance rate for Asia Pacific Journal of Financial Studies"
Hello,
Can someone tell the normal acceptance rate for Asia Pacific Journal of Financial Studies. I am an early researcher and targeting C level journal only for now.
↧
Economist on "is special issue of a journal considered equally good?"
can I write down without "special edition" on my CV?
↧
Economist on "A New Way to Rank Journals"
Instead of the traditional characterization (top 5, top field, etc.), why not use natural cutoff points? Consider the IDEAS 10-Yr recursive discounted rankings (excluding survey journals and moving AER to #5):
1 The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press 10.889
2 Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press 6.209
3 Econometrica, Econometric Society (also covers Econometrica, Econometric Society ) 4.568
4 Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press 4.557
5 American Economic Review, American Economic Association 3.191
6 American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association 4.136
7 American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association 3.521
8 Journal of Finance, American Finance Association 3.226
9 Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier (also covers Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier ) 3.177
10 The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press 3.134
11 Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press 2.881
12 American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association 2.831
13 Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press 2.717
14 Small Business Economics, Springer 2.696
15 Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies 2.636
16 Journal of Economic Growth, Springer 2.628
17 Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association (also covers Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press ) 2.567
18 Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics 2.234
19 Journal of International Economics, Elsevier 2.206
20 Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society (also covers Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society ) 2.131
Apart from AEJ: Macro (Factor > 4), there are natural cutoffs for the top 5, top 10, and top 20
↧
↧
Economist on "Recent experience on economic journal turnaround time"
waiting since 6 months...
really crazy, everywhere i submit it takes forever
↧
Economist on "Gelman: Another Regression Discontinuity Disaster and what can we learn from it"
Here’s a more disturbing picture, which comes from a recent research article, “The Bright Side of Unionization: The Case of Stock Price Crash Risk,” by Jeong-Bon Kim, Eliza Xia Zhang, and Kai Zhong.
↧
Economist on "How fast was your AER to AEJ Fast Track Submission?"
The AER to AEJ Fast track route was offered to me three times now. First time turnaround was 5 months, second time 4,5 months and this time it's already 6 months. Am I an outlier or is the fast track always that slow?
(all three at AEJ micro)
↧
Economist on "Value function interpolation"
is linear interpolation sufficient? What is the standard practice?
↧
↧
Economist on "Capitalists in the Twenty-First Century"
Capitalists in the Twenty-First Century
by Matthew Smith, Danny Yagan, Owen Zidar, and Eric Zwick
Have the idle rich replaced the working rich at the top of the U.S. income distribution? Using tax data linking 11 million firms to their owners, this paper finds that entrepreneurs who actively manage their firms are key for top income inequality. Most top income is non-wage income, a primary source of which is private business profit. These profits accrue to working-age owners of closely-held, mid-market firms in skill-intensive industries. Private business profit falls by three-quarters after owner retirement or premature death. Classifying three-quarters of private business profit as human capital income, we find that most top earners are working rich: they derive most of their income from human capital, not physical or financial capital. The human capital income of private business owners exceeds top wage income and top public equity income. Growth in private business profit is explained by both rising productivity and a rising share of value added accruing to owners.
↧
Economist on "What do you think of Nassim Nicholas Taleb?"
He goes overboard with attacking the theorists. However, his empirical approach makes a lot of sense. It wouldn't be very welcomed in academia, would it?
↧
Economist on "Using a gmail ID for publications"
If you are a faculty member and use a gmail ID instead of your institution in your published paper, does anyone care? Have you seen these cases?
↧