Close

Complete Captcha

• 2 years - 3746 posts - Latest - RSS
• Thread: 1730 Goods vs 769 No Goods

1. Economist
   38f5
   

   It's always been full of superlemons and their connections which is why some of them publish. If you consider all 12 journals for tenure this problem would be solved within a year.

   Thank you for revealing your type. We now understand that you are a low skill researcher who wants to equate first, second, and third tier journals. No one with high quality research skills thinks these are equivalent. You would probably be a happier person if you just recognized that you are a low skill researcher. You can have a nice career publishing in third tier journals. All of this bitterness from low skills is not productive. I enjoy skiing with some members of the national team. Yet, I recognize they have much higher skill and enjoy my own, much lower, skiing accomplishments.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 3 Volod 2 Vlad !

2. Economist
   bef2
   

   It's always been full of superlemons and their connections which is why some of them publish. If you consider all 12 journals for tenure this problem would be solved within a year.

   Thank you for revealing your type. We now understand that you are a low skill researcher who wants to equate first, second, and third tier journals. No one with high quality research skills thinks these are equivalent. You would probably be a happier person if you just recognized that you are a low skill researcher. You can have a nice career publishing in third tier journals. All of this bitterness from low skills is not productive. I enjoy skiing with some members of the national team. Yet, I recognize they have much higher skill and enjoy my own, much lower, skiing accomplishments.

   What are your "high quality research skills"? The ability to repackage a finance paper (which was likely itself repackaged from economics) into a first-tier accounting journal?

   1 year ago # QUOTE 2 Volod 1 Vlad !

3. Economist
   57ff
   

   ^ 100% this

   1 year ago # QUOTE 1 Volod 1 Vlad !

4. Economist
   5e4a
   

   It's always been full of superlemons and their connections which is why some of them publish. If you consider all 12 journals for tenure this problem would be solved within a year.

   Thank you for revealing your type. We now understand that you are a low skill researcher who wants to equate first, second, and third tier journals. No one with high quality research skills thinks these are equivalent. You would probably be a happier person if you just recognized that you are a low skill researcher. You can have a nice career publishing in third tier journals. All of this bitterness from low skills is not productive. I enjoy skiing with some members of the national team. Yet, I recognize they have much higher skill and enjoy my own, much lower, skiing accomplishments.

   I am not the OP, but I agree with him. All 12 journals should be equivalent and have the same importance for tenure. My type is 3 TAR, 2 JAR, ! JAE, 1 RAST, 1 CAR, 2 AJPT, 1 AOS, and some of those you call 3rd tier. I have never worked with your type of network and never will. I prefer pubs with junior faculty and students rather than fueling your corrupt network. I agree with the idea of 12 accounting journals system for tenure and maybe raising the number of journals to 6 of them.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 1 Vlad !

5. Economist
   57ff
   

   For those who think they are “locked out” of JAR/JAE here is the formula:

   1- Find an institutional setting from finance or econ. Replace the dependent variable with something acctg researchers care about… analysts, voluntary disclosure, earnings management, tax avoidance, conservatism, (though not so much conservatism anymore … thanks Ross)

   2- Claim the setting provides exogenous variation in a theoretical construct of interest, and that most prior research on the construct suffers from endogeneity and is therefore crap, from which we can learn nothing. Your paper is different, and not crappy like prior work, because you have exogenous variation. This allows you to draw causal inferences… when all prior work is “mere associations”.

   3- Claim broad generalizable inferences that extend beyond your narrow setting. While it is true your study examines an exogenous shock to companies operating in the salt mines of Rura Pente, it can nonetheless inform us about some great underlying truth broadly applicable and holds in settings where it is yet untested. Again, assertion is key, you don’t have to know it is generalizable to assert it.

   4- Add the words “The Economics of” shortly before the title. Because nothing says JAE/JAR like “The Economics of Disclosure” or “Economics of Audit Partner Tenure” or “Economics of Earnings Management” or “Economics of Tax Avoidance” or “Economics of Audit Fees”

   5- Use big “econ” words like externality, spillovers, adverse selection, moral hazard, real effects, signalling, equilibrium, etc. Whether you use these terms correctly is irrelevant, what matters is that you use them.

   6- No matter the topic of your paper, be sure to reference Jensen and Meckling. They showed that incentives matter. No matter the setting you have, I’m pretty sure that incentives matter. So Jensen and Meckling motivated your predictions..

   7- Include about 2 tables of descriptives and 8 tables of regression results. And don't forget the 50 page Internet Appendix that repeats all your main tables with a different fixed effect structure, standard error clustering choice, or choice of variable measurement. Sure you measured ETRs/discretionary accruals/disclosure using method 1, but what about method 2 through 5.

   8- Present the paper around. Insecure editors often look to acknowledgements to validate that the paper has been vetted by someone other than themselves

   Those 8 things should get you most of the way to a Jar/jae pub but their is one more thing you can do if you get an r&r

   9- Finally, if given the opportunity schmooze the editor (and reviewer) telling them how important their work is, how great and brilliant their comments are and how important they were to improving the paper. Remember, editors hear this all the time and many actually believe it.

   ….The rest is randomness that can only be reduced by social connections of you/your coauthors. Good luck!

   1 year ago # QUOTE 11 Volod 1 Vlad !

6. Economist
   7077
   

   Best and most accurate post ever! Absolutely true!

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

7. Economist
   fb3d
   

   you missed the buzzword machine learning

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

8. Economist
   c041
   

   Best and most accurate post ever! Absolutely true!

   Agree 100 %

   8- Present the paper around. Insecure editors often look to acknowledgements to validate that the paper has been vetted by someone other than themselves

   This is actually true. I received a decision letter by JC (JAE editor) who was wondering why the paper was not presented and received comments.

   The most important thing - NETWORKING. If you believe otherwise, you are naive...ah, last thing - a BYU connection also is a big plus nowadays.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 4 Volod 0 Vlad !

9. Economist
   6539
   

   Am I alone in thinking that so many JMCs this year have jumped on the bandwagon of ESG, CSR, human capital, environmental bs, etc... in light of the JAR/RAS conferences?

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

10. Economist
    9dc3
    

    Am I alone in thinking that so many JMCs this year have jumped on the bandwagon of ESG, CSR, human capital, environmental bs, etc... in light of the JAR/RAS conferences?

    Why are the conferences covering ESG/CSR in the first place? All of the Big 4 have ESG/CSR consulting practices now, and it's the most natural place for expanding the profession's footprint/revenue, since accountants have a natural advantage in what are basically extensions of financial reporting and managerial accounting.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 1 Volod 0 Vlad !

11. Economist
    cfd1
    

    it's disheartening to see demonstrated failures (seasoned AP with 0 pubs) getting hired over demonstrated successes (candidates with pubs/R&R).

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 1 Vlad !

12. Economist
    5f5e
    

    it's disheartening to see demonstrated failures (seasoned AP with 0 pubs) getting hired over demonstrated successes (candidates with pubs/R&R).

    FYI, Whistle-blowing is an alternative to stop this. I made it clear to my dep chair he is not hiring none without a pub if all jmcs with pubs are interviewed.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 4 Vlad !

13. Economist
    5857
    

    it's disheartening to see demonstrated failures (seasoned AP with 0 pubs) getting hired over demonstrated successes (candidates with pubs/R&R).

    FYI, Whistle-blowing is an alternative to stop this. I made it clear to my dep chair he is not hiring none without a pub if all jmcs with pubs are interviewed.

    What are you going to do, exactly?

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

14. Economist
    289a
    

    it's disheartening to see demonstrated failures (seasoned AP with 0 pubs) getting hired over demonstrated successes (candidates with pubs/R&R).

    FYI, Whistle-blowing is an alternative to stop this. I made it clear to my dep chair he is not hiring none without a pub if all jmcs with pubs are interviewed.

    just like certain underachieving students get hired by Big4 over other much more able students, certain proven l3m0n faculty are hired over proven good researchers.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

15. Economist
    91bf
    

    Did everyone clap?

    it's disheartening to see demonstrated failures (seasoned AP with 0 pubs) getting hired over demonstrated successes (candidates with pubs/R&R).

    FYI, Whistle-blowing is an alternative to stop this. I made it clear to my dep chair he is not hiring none without a pub if all jmcs with pubs are interviewed.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

16. Economist
    5857
    

    The "proven good researchers" in this case being glorified RAs without an independent thought in the world?

    1 year ago # QUOTE 2 Volod 0 Vlad !

17. Economist
    38f5
    

    It's always been full of superlemons and their connections which is why some of them publish. If you consider all 12 journals for tenure this problem would be solved within a year.

    Thank you for revealing your type. We now understand that you are a low skill researcher who wants to equate first, second, and third tier journals. No one with high quality research skills thinks these are equivalent. You would probably be a happier person if you just recognized that you are a low skill researcher. You can have a nice career publishing in third tier journals. All of this bitterness from low skills is not productive. I enjoy skiing with some members of the national team. Yet, I recognize they have much higher skill and enjoy my own, much lower, skiing accomplishments.

    There are numerous schools across the country competing to be a top a school. If you think counting 12 journals as all the same, you should try this experiment at your school. If your implied argument is correct, then your school will rise in rank and dominant the profession.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

18. Economist
    7095
    

    The game is rigged. So what? Do you really want to be tenured at a top school? Those people work 60+ hours a week. For what? A little extra money? Bragging rights?

    Life is good at low-ranked schools. Don’t let anyone tell you differently. The pay is less, but you will probably make more per hour than faculty at top-ranked places. If you really want to be in the top school/journal club then focus on the things you can control (your work) instead of the things you can’t (the system).

    1 year ago # QUOTE 1 Volod 1 Vlad !

19. Economist
    68cc
    

    The game is rigged. So what? Do you really want to be tenured at a top school? Those people work 60+ hours a week. For what? A little extra money? Bragging rights?
    Life is good at low-ranked schools. Don’t let anyone tell you differently. The pay is less, but you will probably make more per hour than faculty at top-ranked places. If you really want to be in the top school/journal club then focus on the things you can control (your work) instead of the things you can’t (the system).

    We pay to buy a car(s), we pay taxes to build roads, we pay for traffic lights, but driving is still a privilege. How ironic is you work hard but the system says no, you don't. Is that what you said? Not that I care about top schools, but it got to be the one who decides, if not a privilege!

    1 year ago # QUOTE 1 Volod 0 Vlad !

20. Economist
    7095
    

    with that kind of grammar, you need to work a lot harder.

    The game is rigged. So what? Do you really want to be tenured at a top school? Those people work 60+ hours a week. For what? A little extra money? Bragging rights?
    Life is good at low-ranked schools. Don’t let anyone tell you differently. The pay is less, but you will probably make more per hour than faculty at top-ranked places. If you really want to be in the top school/journal club then focus on the things you can control (your work) instead of the things you can’t (the system).

    We pay to buy a car(s), we pay taxes to build roads, we pay for traffic lights, but driving is still a privilege. How ironic is you work hard but the system says no, you don't. Is that what you said? Not that I care about top schools, but it got to be the one who decides, if not a privilege!

    1 year ago # QUOTE 2 Volod 1 Vlad !

Reply »