New Rank in Economics

[israelecon]

Originally Posted by Fatrapa

I think there are a lot of very good papers in second or even third tier journals. Conversely, there can be very very bad paper in top journals (I remember a paper by Zilotti and al. that was just terribly bad with hypothesis totally unacceptable and it was just published in the AER). I really believe everyone should not judge the quality of a paper upon where it is published. You will miss a lot of good stuffs.

this could be true, but since you have a limited amount of time you are better of searching in the top journals than looking for the one good article that may or may not have been published in a third-rank journal.
besides, when it comes to getting tenure, promotion, etc, what matters is the quality of the journal you publish in, not the quality of the paper itself.

[Fatrapa]

But that is a strong and distateful bais, isn't it?
You should care less about what do to do to get a tenure than to do good research. Of course the best possible situation is when you produce something important that is published in a reputed journal. But then between a bad article in a good journal and a good article in a bad journal, what would be your choice?
To get a little more precise, I should define what I understand by good or bad article. I believe that an article you write on the fashionable subject of the day in order to be published in a top journal is likely a bad article. Inversely, an article you really care about because you think it is good and improve the understanding of a subject is a good article. Would you accept this last article to be published in a second tier journal? Or would you just drop it if it was rejected from a top journal?
By the way, I do my researches by key word and do not care if the article is a working paper, a non cited one or whatever. I do not know if it is a better way of doing research but it is more convenient for me...

[econphilomath]

Both of you guys are right in a way. But the main point here is that the ranking we all saw is really really weird and thus one naturally begins to suspect it might not be very robust. Then we add the info that it has been published in a journal of low prestige and this re enforces ones belief that the AER editor sent the paper packing because its methods suck.

Probably the best way (more scholarly) would be to read the paper carefully and figure out what might be making it go crazy.

Personally I don't have the time nor interest in figuring it out but I have to limit myself to wonder and not to completely discredit a paper because it doesn't fit my priors.

[israelecon]

i am not saying all good articles are in top journals. this argument can be made for some difference in the rankings, but come on guys, SEJ is way down there in quality. the probability that it is a good article and could not be published in any of the 50 or so better ranked journal is infinitesimal.
i don't mean to sound not nice here, but it is likely what you consider a decent article today you will consider garbage once you have more experience and after you do your own quality research. not everything "interesting" is good research. many newspaper articles are interesting and include things i have never thought about, but they are not research or worth anything to anyone who does have a deeper understanding of the field. so we inexperienced people should not be the ones who say "we learned something new, so its a good article", because frankly we still don't know anything, so many very mundane things are new to us. obviously some referee, or if it was published in such a low ranked journal, many many referees deemed this article not very worthy.
in any case, i actually asked a professor of mine about SEJ (because of this discussion and he said: "i would rather throw the article in the garbage than publish it there". i think this does say something about the article.

[paradox3696]

I wonder what type of students he would produce and lead in the real world with that type of unprofessional "professorship".

Originally Posted by israelecon

in any case, i actually asked a professor of mine about SEJ (because of this discussion and he said: "i would rather throw the article in the garbage than publish it there". i think this does say something about the article.

[israelecon]

why unprofessional?
why is trying to keep a high level, and accepting only the best unprofessional?
rather, i would think publishing junk just to get it published is unprofessional.
it seems you think professional = mediocrity.

[486hunter]

Not every article (even if it is excellent research!) is destined for a top journal. With regard to empirical work, top journals want to publish research that is both good and convincing. But often even the most nuanced analysis fails to make up for deficiencies in the data. This is not to say that the research isn't excellent and, in fact, the article may still make an important contribution to the field. It's just that given the selectivity of top journals, these articles may end up in something lower ranked (or a journal that is more topically focused).

It's also worth noting that there is more than one way to build a solid academic career. Some academics are homerun hitters -- they aim to publish 1-2 articles a year, each of which is destined for a top journal. Other research endeavors are not worth their time. Others are singles hitters -- they are much more prolific but the quality of the journals in which they publish is more variable. Both approaches can bring success.

[econphilomath]

Ok so I tried but failed to diffuse a tense discussion.

[beagle07]

Originally Posted by israelecon

why unprofessional?
why is trying to keep a high level, and accepting only the best unprofessional?
rather, i would think publishing junk just to get it published is unprofessional.
it seems you think professional = mediocrity.

I think paradox was saying that it is unprofessional for your professor to insult and demean a journal instead of using evidence and argument. To tell a student that the hard work and intellectual pursuits of hundreds of people is on the same level as physical refuse is a lesson in arrogance and nastiness.

[486hunter]

Originally Posted by beagle07

I think paradox was saying that it is unprofessional for your professor to insult and demean a journal instead of using evidence and argument. To tell a student that the hard work and intellectual pursuits of hundreds of people is on the same level as physical refuse is a lesson in arrogance and nastiness.

I agree -- it is one thing to strive to be the best. But to demean the accomplishments of others in such a crass way is exceedingly distasteful. This professor could have chosen a much more tactful way to impart that, in his opinion, you should aim higher.