"Nobel Laureate George Akerlof ’s seminal paper on the market for lemons was rejected by American Economic Review, which replied that “AER did not publish such trivial stuff”. The Journal of Political Economy rejected the paper for being “too general to be true”. The Review of Economic Studies rejected it because, again, “it was too trivial” (Shugan (2007)). In the 40 years since the Quarterly Journal of Economics eventually published Akerlof ’s paper in 1970, it has received 2,345 ISI citations (September 2010). Similarly, Shepherd (1995) reports on Sharpe’s account of the publication journey of his famous capital asset pricing model. The editor of Journal of Finance told Sharpe that his “assumption that all investors made the same predictions was so preposterous that it makes his conclusions uninteresting”. But the paper, since published, had received 2,093 ISI citations by September 2010. As Staelin (1998) confirms, many economics articles that we today consider extremely influential originally and repeatedly were rejected by some top journals."
Par Reinartz (2011) Feeling Good or Feeling Right? - Discussion of “Quantitative and Qualitative Rankings of Scholars” by Rost and Frey, sbr 63, 109-114
Merci à Julien T. pour m'avoir fait découvrir cet article !
Pole 3C : Comportement, Cerveau Cognition
Il y a 13 ans
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire