Citations, journal ranking and multiple authorships reconsidered: evidence from almost one million articles

Wohlrabe, Klaus and Sommer, Vera (2016): Citations, journal ranking and multiple authorships reconsidered: evidence from almost one million articles. Forthcoming in: Applied Economics Letters

Abstract

In this paper we reconsider the investigation by \cite{moosa2016} using a much larger data set of almost one million articles listed in RePEc. This article provides new insights into the effects of co-authorship on citation counts and the correlation between quality of papers and quality of the publishing journal. Our evidence is partially in contrast to the results reported in Moosa (2016). We find a positive correlation between the h-index of a journal and the quality of papers measured in terms of citations. This correlation becomes almost perfect using a non-linear model. Results from a regression of citation counts on the number of authors show evidence of a positive and significant effect of co-authorship on the quality of a paper when time effects and large sets of top-cited articles are taken into account. The inclusion of time effects and the large data set, that allows to differentiate between top-cited cohorts, add further insights to the existing literature.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Citations, multiple authorship, journal quality, RePEc
• Subjects: A - General Economics and Teaching > A1 - General Economics > A12 - Relation of Economics to Other Disciplines; A - General Economics and Teaching > A1 - General Economics > A14 - Sociology of Economics

References

Arellano, M., and S. Bond (1991): “Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations,” The Review of Economic Studies, 58(2), 277–297.

Card, D., and S. DellaVigna (2013): “Nine Facts about Top Journals in Economics,” Journal of Economic Literature, 51(1), 144–61.

Moosa, I. A. (2016): “Citations, journal ranking and multiple authorships: evidence based on the top 300 papers in economics,” Applied Economics Letters, p. in press.

Nowell, C., and T. Grijalva (2011): “Trends in co-authorship in economics since 1985,” Applied Economics, 43(28), 4369–4375.

Oswald, A. J. (2007): “An Examination of the Reliability of Prestigious Scholarly Journals: Evidence and Implications for Decision-Makers,” Economica, 74(293), 21–31.

Rath, K., and K. Wohlrabe (2016): “Recent trends in co-authorship in economics: evidence from RePEc,” Applied Economics Letters, 23(12), 897–902.

Rath, K., and K. Wohlrabe (2016): “Trends in economics publications represented by JEL categories between 2007 and 2013,” Applied Economics Letters, 23(9), 660–663.

Seiler, C., and K. Wohlrabe (2012): “Ranking economists on the basis of many indicators: An alternative approach using RePEc data,” Journal of Informetrics, 6(2), 389–402.

Seiler, C., and K. Wohlrabe (2014): “How robust are journal rankings based on the impact factor? Evidence from the economic sciences,” Journal of Informetrics, 8(4), 904–911.

Sutter, M., and M. Kocher (2004): “Patterns of co-authorship among economics departments in the USA,” Applied Economics, 36(4), 327–333.

Zimmermann, C. (2013): “Academic rankings with RePEc,” Econometrics, 1(3), 249–280.