Getting published in
international journals
John Mangan, Australian Institute for
Business and Economics (AIBE)
The importance of publishing in economics
• Academic journals are an important outlet for dissemination of
academic research
• Other outlets are important too, and more so than in natural
sciences
• However, printed refereed journals were seen as essential by
97% of the academics in the Social Sciences (Conley, Önder,
Crucini and Driskill, 2011, ‘Publication lags and young
economists’ research output’)
• Books are seen as more important than journals only in Arts and
Humanities (Conley et. al 2011)
2
Journal selection – “top” and “decent”
journals
• What constitutes a “top” journal? Or a “decent” journal?
• Numerous journal rating systems
– show a close correlation of journal rankings
• Should I aim for the top 3 general? Top 5 general (but are
they general)? What about specialized journals?
• Hierarchies in sub-fields:
– Labour economics
– Public economics
– Monetary economics
3
LIFE IS TOUGH: acceptance rates of
leading journals
American Economic review
0.07
Industrial and Labor Relations Review
0.18
American Sociological Review
0.08
Journal of Human Resources
0.10
Econometrica
0.09
Journal of Labor Economics
0.08
Journal of Political Economy
0.05
Journal of Monetary Economics
0.20
Quarterly Journal of Economics
0.04
Journal of Population Economics
0.21
BEJ Applied Economics
0.51
Journal of Public Economics
0.10
Canadian Journal of Economics
0.18
Labour Economics
0.15
Economica
0.11
RAND Journal of Economics
0.11
Economics Letters
0.17
Review of Economics and Statistics
0.12
European Economic Review
0.09
American Political Science Review
0.08
4
Rising submission intensity: Quarterly
Journal of Economics
New submissions for publication, QJE
1,430
1,050
400
1996
2006
2012
• QJE publishes 40-44 articles per year
• 62% culled by editors; approximately 500 sent to reviewers
• Most papers rejected with referee reports are strong papers that
end up being published in other leading journals
5
Publication policy: Quarterly Journal of
Economics
• Most “revise and resubmit” are eventually accepted
• ‘The vast majority of papers we ask for revisions do end
up being accepted. I know there is nothing more
frustrating for authors than being asked to completely
redo your paper in a major revision and then being
rejected’(Larry Katz, editor of QJE, 2012)
6
How to succeed
• Research on topics that interest you… but keep the profession in mind
– be aware of touchstone issues
• Think about how your research fits in specific literature
• 60-70% of articles in AER and EJ are co-authored, so look for some
good people to work with
• Growing percentage of multi-disciplinary topics even in top journals
• Differentiate your product
• Summarize main points
7
Have an interesting title!
• “Stressed Out on Four Continents: Time Crunch or
Yuppie, Kvetch,”, D. Hamermesh and J. Lee, REStat,
2007
• “Love Thy Neighbour; How Much Bigotry is there in
Western Countries”, V. Borooah & J. Mangan, Kyklos
60(3), 2007
• “Home is Where the Hurt is: An Econometric Analysis of
Spousal Abuse” V. Borooah and J. Mangan, Applied
Economics, 2009 (voted one of the top 50 articles in
Management and Economics for 2009)
8
Typical structure of a paper
• Introduction
– NOT a literature review
– state aim of paper and its place in the economic research
– a statement of the problem, its background and importance
• Do not include a literature review
– cited papers fit in to illustrate only
• Theory or theoretical basis
• Data description
– stress uniqueness if possible
• Results
• Tests and/or implications of results
• Conclusions/implications
9
Views of Daniel S. Hamermesh
• Results shouldn’t be a “breathless romp through the data”
• Stress/discuss the original; spend no time on standard results
• Results must be linked to theoretical derivation—and vice-versa
• Tests and implications
– various tests for robustness of results—but only major ones
– minor checks go in footnotes
• Uses of the results
– explicit applications to problems, e.g. simulating policy responses,
analyzing implications for interesting phenomena
10
Learn from rejection
• Always resubmit if invited to
• Carefully consider reviewers’ comments even if you
disagree
• Think of long-term goals, not next years’ promotion
round
• Have a thick hide – the review process can be arbitrary
and ad hoc
11
Questions?
• Questions or comments?
• Thank you for your time!
• jmangan@bel.uq.edu.au
12