August 5, 2014
While traffic has been in the traditional Summer lull (388,850 file downloads and 1,559,593 abstract views in July 2014), things have been surprisingly active on RePEc. We welcomed 15 new RePEc archives: Ekonomik Yaklasim Dernegi, History of Economic Ideas, Cuadernos de Economía, Architexturez Imprints, Synergiz, University of Pennsylvania (II), INRA (III), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, University of Southern California (II), Canadian Centre for Health Economics, Ekonomika Society of Economists Niš, Glasgow Caledonian University, HETFA Research Institute, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration (II).
These, and the existing RePEc archives, have contributed to an unprecedented inflow of newly indexed material: 7,401 papers and 27,768 articles. This allowed the RePEc holdings to surpass 1 million articles and 1.6 million documents. Also, the last 100,000 new documents were indexed in a record time, six months and two days.
Finally IDEAS added a new feature, with backlinks from papers and articles listed on the Economics Replication Wiki. Now on to the thresholds we reached.
3000000 cumulative book abstract views
1600000 indexed documents
1000000 indexed articles
2000 indexed journals
2000 contributors to the RePEc Genealogy
July 16, 2014
A major part of the scientific process is the replication of previous studies, something necessary to confirm that things were done right, that they are not sensitive to details and that results have not changed with the passage of time, either because the methods got better or the data has evolved. Unfortunately, there is little replication in economics, and if there is some, it is difficult to publish it. One can theorize why this may be the case, but it is clear replication studies are little valued and not particularly welcome in journals. It is also quite difficult to determine whether a particular study has been replicated.
To help with all that, the Center for Statistics at the University of Göttingen (Germany) has launched a Wiki to index replicated and replicating studies in economics, with funding from the Institute for New Economic Thinking. As it is a wiki, it is crowd-sourced in the sense that any registered person can amend the records, and in particular add replication studies. One can also add to a list of articles published in top journals that should warrant replication and vote (anonymously) from that list (current winners).
The listings on this Replication Wiki are now indexed on IDEAS as well. The principle is similar to the indexation of Wikipedia articles: if a study on the Wiki has a link to IDEAS (or EconPapers, IDEAS will link back. Those adding or amending entries on the Wiki are thus encouraged to link to the IDEAS abstract page to create the backlink on IDEAS.
As any crowd-sourced project, the Replication Wiki will only live from the participation from the public. If you know of replication studies, consider spending a few minutes and add to this wiki.
July 4, 2014
We got a good crop of new participating archives this month: Italian Association for the Study of Economic Asymmetries, National Association of Romanian Valuers, Association of Private Enterprise Education, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, VU University Amsterdam, Centre for Macroeconomics (London), Small Arms Data Observatory, Şcoala Naţională de Studii Politice şi Administrative, Journal of Studies in Dynamics and Change, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA).
Traffic was rather low this month, though: 416,168 file downloads and 1,728,798 abstract views. This was in part due to a larger than usual share of raw traffic we had to eliminate because it looked suspicious. Unfortunately, these checks take longer and longer because we see more and more creative and puzzling things in our logs.
And we reached the following thresholds:
125000000 cumulative article abstract views
900000 listed articles are available online
500000 listed papers are available online
10000 utils used in transactions in the fantasy league market
July 1, 2014
With the next RePEc rankings and statistics to be released in a few days, a couple of small changes will be implemented.
First, we have adjusted the way the recursive and discounted recursive impact factors were used for weighting article pages, documents, and citations. A scaling factor was previously applied twice instead of once. The correction does not affect the rankings in any way, but it allows authors to replicate their scores. New scores are 21.4 times higher.
Second, we have started preventing republished articles from counting in the impact factors of the republishing journal. Also, these articles are dropped from the list of top recent works.
June 17, 2014
The Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis is hosting a conference on the challenges of economic information and data. The event will take place September 29 and 30, 2014, and will feature Hal Varian (Chief economist, Google) and Neil Fantom (Open Data manager, the World Bank). Submissions are invited until July 9, 2014. The conference’s website is here
June 3, 2014
What was new in RePEc in May? We announced significant enhancements to the series and author pages on CitEc, our citation extraction project. Also, we have just added a ranking of European economics departments. We have also welcomed the following new RePEc archives: Alma Mater University of Sibiu, University of Warsaw, Asia Pacific Institute of Research, University of West Virginia (II), Instytut Badañ Gospodarczych, Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány, Principled Societies Project, University of Rijeka, Maryland Institute of Research, Universidade de Vigo (II), French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists. We counted 549,441 file downloads and 2,350,152 abstract views.
Finally, we reached these thresholds:
5000000 cumulative software item abstract views
600000 cited documents
300000 working papers with extracted references
750 NEP reports dispatched to field editors
May 27, 2014
I just learned about a new journal with a new concept that sounds interesting: Royal Society Open Science. It has a review process and will publish all articles which are scientifically sound, leaving judgement of importance and impact to the reader.
This seems apposite because printing costs and distribution costs are practically absent in the Internet age. So there is no big point in rationing publication space (that is not scarce anymore) by “importance” or “impact”.
Unfortunately this journal does not cover economics.