It's sickening..
and the JF board even voted to give PGP a best paper award for a data mining exercise... AS must have an affair with him
Forthcoming JF by Yale profs is a rip-off of LRM paper
-
This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.13212
-
This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.13212
it is sad.
-
Tbh of all of the EJMR “scandals” this one always seemed pretty weak. They updated their lit review to give everyone credit and acknowledged the oversight.
Sure, once the paper is accepted....
Would have been desk rejected if properly attributed originally
This is the game, just like Petra
Hrms pretend they are first
-
Tbh of all of the EJMR “scandals” this one always seemed pretty weak. They updated their lit review to give everyone credit and acknowledged the oversight.
Sure, once the paper is accepted....
Would have been desk rejected if properly attributed originally
This is the game, just like Petra
Hrms pretend they are firstIt just seems like most people realize that the system is unfair, and then latch on to somewhat instances of this unfairness without a sense of proportion. It’s possible P&S deliberately mislead us but the evidence for that just seems very weak.
-
Tbh of all of the EJMR “scandals” this one always seemed pretty weak. They updated their lit review to give everyone credit and acknowledged the oversight.
Sure, once the paper is accepted....
Would have been desk rejected if properly attributed originally
This is the game, just like Petra
Hrms pretend they are firstIt just seems like most people realize that the system is unfair, and then latch on to somewhat instances of this unfairness without a sense of proportion. It’s possible P&S deliberately mislead us but the evidence for that just seems very weak.
JF set up an example. It is ok to not do a thorough literature review. Not a big deal. Well done JF!
-
What are you talking about? Econjorumors killed Petra P career. Since the discussions here her career never recovered. She doesn't have a top publication since then. It killed Andrew K career, even though he had crazy connections. And I will never look at KS and PGS the same way or referee their papers in the same way. They will pay a price.
This also shows this 50-page thread is a joke after all. No serious journals will ever take things discussed here seriously.
-
yes, also the price is not evident yet.
What are you talking about? Econjorumors killed Petra P career. Since the discussions here her career never recovered. She doesn't have a top publication since then. It killed Andrew K career, even though he had crazy connections. And I will never look at KS and PGS the same way or referee their papers in the same way. They will pay a price.
This also shows this 50-page thread is a joke after all. No serious journals will ever take things discussed here seriously.
-
It is also shown as being published in Economic Bulletin on Github: https://seantoconnor.github.io/research/
So how does an UVLRM paper in a low tier economics journal get recycled by HRMs into a JF? Hint: strategically omitted citation.
Someone should type up the JF comment fast before they retract it.Can't they just add Footnote Number 7? Isn't that the proper etiquette?