RePEc in April 2011

May 5, 2011

This past month, the following institutions started contributing to RePEc metadata about their publications: Illinois State University, Babes-Bolyai University, Far Eastern Research Centre, German Academic Association for Business Research, Scientificpapers.org, African Development Bank, Nicolaus Copernicus Scientific Publishing House, Wroclaw University of Technology, Intersentia, Oxford University Press (II), Athenaeum University of Bucharest. We also counted 797,285 file downloads and 2,695,343 abstract views. It was a relatively calm month, but there is much in store for the coming ones.

And in terms of new thresholds, we have:
80000 articles with references
10000 books listed
600 weekly NEP-ALL reports sent


About author affiliations

April 26, 2011

When authors register at the RePEc Author Service, they are asked to provide their affiliation(s). Here, I want to clarify a few items about how affiliations are handled within RePEc. It is important that authors maintain their affiliations current, so that the proper institutions can get credit for their accomplishments.

What an affiliation is
An institution that pays the authors for his work. This may include current visiting positions, courtesy appointments and emeritus status. This is basically the institution(s) one would put under one’s name in a publication.

What an affiliation is not
Former place of study or work. Societies or associations. Consulting gigs. Banks where you hold an account (we have seen it all).

How to affiliate yourself in the system
There is a database of institutions derived from EDIRC that is used for affiliations. For universities, affiliations are listed at the department, center or institute level. Search in the database first, and only if you do not find your affiliation, suggest a new entry (90% of received suggestions are already in the database). Only affiliations from the database will count towards rankings, suggestions will not. Accepted suggestions will be converted.

About multiple affiliations
One can have multiple affiliations. But be aware that, for ranking purposes, each affiliation is attributed a share of the author’s scores. This means in particular that an author with affiliations in several countries will not count fully in each. We want to let authors decide what the shares should be, but until this is instituted, the temporary solution is a probabilistic calculation of what the main affiliation could be. The author’s email address, personal homepage and the number of affiliates at each institution are inputs in the formula. Authors can see their weights by following the ranking analysis link in their month email from RePEc. Affiliations not listed in EDIRC get a default value in the calculation.

Removing affiliations
To adjust affiliations, authors should log into the RePEc Author Service and click on “affiliations”. We leave authors authority on what they consider their proper affiliations and will not override their choices. The only exception is when some authority from an affiliated institution asks the author to be removed from the list.

Special cases
Deceased authors are considered to be unaffiliated. We welcome notifications and will adjust records in this respect. In particular, some of the authors with whom we have lost contact may have left us. Note that the latter do not count towards their affiliations either, the presumption being that the reason their email address is not valid any more is that they have changed employment.
Authors with write-in affiliation(s) are ranked in a country if it can be guessed from the URL of the affiliation (country domain), and if not from their email address.


RePEc in March 2011

April 4, 2011

March was a productive month. The Plagiarism Committee is now officially active. We counted 891,824 file downloads and 2,961,565 abstract views over the month. And we welcomed a large crop of newly participating archives: Swiss National Bank, University of Finance and Management in Warsaw, Banco Central de Bolivia, Asociación de Economía de la Educación, Universidad Iberoamericana, Eurasia Business and Economics Society, Universidad Cristobal Colon, Université de Namur, Brandeis University (II), Edith Cowan University, Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance, Università di Ferrara, Ekonomiaz, University of Haifa, and University of Exeter. Finally, we reached some important thresholds over the past month:

40000000 cumulative downloads on IDEAS
2000000 cumulative downloads through NEP
900000 works listed online
600000 abstracts listed
300000 working paper abstracts
1250 journals listed


RePEc in February 2011

March 3, 2011

February is usually a short and calm month, with counted 755,270 file downloads and 2,478,417 abstract views. The following archives are now participating with RePEc: University of Alaska Anchorage, University of Utrecht (II), Association Africaine pour les Sciences Sociales, Sapienza University of Rome (III), Romanian Water Association, Institute for Studies in Industrial Development, University of Bergamo (II).

In terms of new initiative, a plagiarism committee is soliciting comments and volunteers.

And finally the thresholds we reached over the last month:

600000 journal articles
600000 claims in author profiles
500000 book chapter downloads
300000 working paper abstracts
12000 institution records
4500 series and journals
3000 working paper series


Plagiarism in Economics

February 16, 2011

We are all aware that plagiarism exists, and RePEc has helped expose quite a few cases through its open bibliographies. But sanctions for plagiarism are rather limited. An offended party may complain with the administration of the accused offender, in some cases without consequences, and in others with sanctions that can lead to dismissal. But the now convicted offender may simply take a new job as if nothing happened, the new employer being oblivious to what happened.

Economics does not have an ethics board that could deal with such cases beyond the current employer of an accused offender. There is now a proposal to create a committee dedicated to plagiarism. This committee would examine cases and vote on sanctions which may go all the way to publicly exposing the plagiarist. A group of volunteers have are discussed a simple set of procedures. Over the next month, the plan is to solicit comments from the public through this blog and call for further volunteers to participate in the committee. After that the committee would become active and deal with any new plagiarism cases that come to its attention. Please contact any current member to participate.

To view the current proposal and committee members, see a simple and bare bones site at plagiarism.repec.org. The committee awaits your reaction. Beyond comments, you can also vote your reaction below.


RePEc in January 2011

February 4, 2011

The big news this month is that RePEc now indexes over one million items. We RePEc started, it was not imaginable that so many works would be listed. To see the evolution over the 13 years of RePEc, see the last blog post.

Over this last month, 743,140 file downloads and 2,469,187 abstract views were counted. Remarkably, while articles have been outnumbering working papers for quite some time in the database, last month they also outnumbered in terms of traffic for the first time. This shows how much more popular working papers are. Also, we welcomed 6 new archives: Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Society for Promotion of Business Information Technology, Zeitschrift für Nachwuchswissenschafler, European University at St. Petersburg, INFORMS, and Cankaya University.

Finally, the monthly thresholds reached:
80000000 cumulative article abstract views
1500000 cumulative book chapter abstract views
1000000 listed works


RePEc now indexes over one million works

January 25, 2011

RePEc has reached over the last week-end a historic mark: one million works in Economics and neighboring sciences are now indexed, of which 87.5% are available for download. The bibliographic database is comprised by 59.2% of journal articles, 38.5% of working papers, 1.3% of book chapters, 0.8% of books, and 0.2% of software components. All this material has been indexed by volunteers maintaining close to 1300 archives. As RePEc bears no costs, all the data is made available for free.

When RePEc started in June 1997, it built on a stock of metadata with 40,000 entries from its precursor NetEc, which started in 1992. Since then, data holdings have increased in an ever increasing fashion:

ItemsDate
100,000August 2000
200,000July 2003
300,000January 2005
400,000July 2006
500,000September 2007
600,000June 2008
700,000January 2009
800,000September 2009
900,000April 2010
1,000,000January 2011

The data collected by RePEc is used by a large number of free core services, including EconPapers, EconomistsOnline, IDEAS, NEP and Socionet. Other services that use RePEc data, however without reporting back usage statistics include, among others, Econlit, Google Scholar, Inomics, Microsoft Academic Search, and Worldcat.


RePEc in December 2010 and a look back at 2010

January 6, 2011

As a new year has started, it is time to recapitulate what was achieved over the last year. But let us first mention December 2010. We welcomed 14 new archives to RePEc: Prague Development Center, Asociación de Economía Ecológica en España, Technische Universität Berlin (II), International Black Sea University, Instytut Rozwoju, Haute Ecole de Gestion Arc, Université de Neuchâtel (II), Universidade de Brasília, Stanford University (II), Indian Institute of Foreign Trade, Université des Antilles et de la Guyane, Czestochowa Technical University, Research on Money and Finance, Stanford University. We counted 681,877 file downloads and 2,328,640 abstract views and reached the following thresholds:

6000000 references extracted
2500000 citations linked within RePEc
400000 downloads through NEP in a single year
200000 items with JEL codes
175000 articles with citations

Now to 2010: Over the year, RePEc welcomed 146 new participating archives, bringing the total to 1266. They all added 64973 working papers in 245 new series and 97720 articles in 177 new journals. This added 161885 works that are available online and increased by 20% the listings in RePEc. 3988 authors joined the RePEc Author Service, and their profiles now list 111877 more works than a year earlier. NEP sent 4448 weekly reports about new research, and the RePEc services that share statistics recorded 8,989,727 downloads and 30,777,612 abstract views. These last numbers are lower than the previous year because of a further tightening of criteria.

In terms of new features and services, the following were added during the year, among others: EconomistsOnline is a new RePEc service that allows to search the database in a different way than existing services We also introduced RSS feeds for articles, papers, series and journals, and a few new rankings.


RePEc in November 2010

December 4, 2010

November is typically a month where all activities reach a high for the second half of the year, and this has not failed. We counted 849,932 file downloads and 3,417,357 abstract views through RePEc services, with almost record traffic at NEP. The bigger news is that EconPapers has reached two major thresholds: 10 million downloads and 40 million abstract views since the start of the service.

We also welcomed 12 new archives: Annual Reviews, Cologne Graduate School, Universität Osnabrück, Oxford University (III), Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna di Pisa, University of Information Technology and Management (Poland), Università di Cassino, Brandeis University, Dunarea de Jos University of Galati, National Technical University of Athens, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo Leon.

Finally, these are the thresholds we reached over the past month:
40000000 cumulative abstract views on EconPapers
10000000 cumulative downloads on EconPapers
6000000 references extracted by CitEc
75000 articles with references extracted
30000 reports mailed by NEP
8000 books listed


NEP: 30000 reports and going

November 24, 2010

NEP (New Economics Papers) is an important element in the collection of services that use RePEc data. It disseminates through email and RSS weekly reports about new working papers in 85 different fields, each compiled by volunteer editors. This project has recently surpassed 30000 reports sent since 1998 to currently over email 60000 subscriptions from close to 30000 unique email addresses, announcing over 150000 papers on average to two field reports.

The quantity of information digested by this project has grown considerably over the years. Currently about 500 new papers a week are analyzed, a number too large for editors to manage. Thus several years ago an expert system has been put in place that learns on the choices of the editors and offers them every week the complete list of papers for selection, but placing the most likely choices first. It is remarkable how well this works, thereby saving our volunteers considerable time.

Volunteers are still welcome, for example to help with the general management of the project, help with existing reports or open new reports in fields not yet covered. Interested people should contact Marco Novarese.