would it be new top 6?
Rank AER insights
-
It seems clear from accepted papers that it will be around AEJ level. They are mostly taking older papers from top people that didn't get into top 5.
I think this is partly due to the "no revisions" rule at AER:I. It's safer to accept without revisions papers of HRMs that have already received ref comments in top 5 journals. They won't take a paper that hasn't been reviewed elsewhere before.
-
It seems clear from accepted papers that it will be around AEJ level. They are mostly taking older papers from top people that didn't get into top 5.
I think this is partly due to the "no revisions" rule at AER:I. It's safer to accept without revisions papers of HRMs that have already received ref comments in top 5 journals. They won't take a paper that hasn't been reviewed elsewhere before.
Very disappointing to have yet another clubby journal being established and promoted. AER:I is worse than QJE and JPE.
-
It seems clear from accepted papers that it will be around AEJ level. They are mostly taking older papers from top people that didn't get into top 5.
I think this is partly due to the "no revisions" rule at AER:I. It's safer to accept without revisions papers of HRMs that have already received ref comments in top 5 journals. They won't take a paper that hasn't been reviewed elsewhere before.
This is so transparently corrupt.
-
It seems clear from accepted papers that it will be around AEJ level. They are mostly taking older papers from top people that didn't get into top 5.
I think this is partly due to the "no revisions" rule at AER:I. It's safer to accept without revisions papers of HRMs that have already received ref comments in top 5 journals. They won't take a paper that hasn't been reviewed elsewhere before.
I'm not seeing this as a policy on their website? Link?
-
It seems clear from accepted papers that it will be around AEJ level. They are mostly taking older papers from top people that didn't get into top 5.
I think this is partly due to the "no revisions" rule at AER:I. It's safer to accept without revisions papers of HRMs that have already received ref comments in top 5 journals. They won't take a paper that hasn't been reviewed elsewhere before.
I'm not seeing this as a policy on their website? Link?
AER: Insights will target the turnaround times of the most efficient journals in our profession—with an aim to get all first responses within three months at most. More novelly, first responses will be either a reject or a "conditional accept," with no lengthy responses to referees required nor a second round of comments from referees on the revision. The Editor's requests with a conditional accept will be limited to expositional changes only; to self-enforce this norm, editors will ask for revisions back from the authors within eight weeks. Short papers. Short revisions.
-
^ I think 650b was asking about the claim that "They won't take a paper that hasn't been reviewed elsewhere before." This is not an official policy.
Oh of course. I never said it was official policy. It's just IMO the expected result of the "No R&Rs" policy they do have. We know that no paper is simply accepted at once in a top econ journal. Referees will always ask for something more/less. I expect that editors at AER:I will play it safe and mostly accept only papers that they know were already vetted/commented by referees in a top journal, or simply trust that the work is correct because it's coming from a HRM.
-
^ I think 650b was asking about the claim that "They won't take a paper that hasn't been reviewed elsewhere before." This is not an official policy.
Oh of course. I never said it was official policy. It's just IMO the expected result of the "No R&Rs" policy they do have. We know that no paper is simply accepted at once in a top econ journal. Referees will always ask for something more/less. I expect that editors at AER:I will play it safe and mostly accept only papers that they know were already vetted/commented by referees in a top journal, or simply trust that the work is correct because it's coming from a HRM.
Just curious: how will they know if the paper has already been reviewed for another journal?
-
It's in everyone's interests that this journal become perceived as AER-level. Another outlet for tenure when page space in top-5's has not kept pace with submissions.
This shifts value to those close to Duflo's applied circle. Ignore it if you wish, of course I can't back it up with direct evidence, they are not dumb.
-
It's in everyone's interests that this journal become perceived as AER-level. Another outlet for tenure when page space in top-5's has not kept pace with submissions.
This shifts value to those close to Duflo's applied circle. Ignore it if you wish, of course I can't back it up with direct evidence, they are not dumb.
Duflo isn't one of the editors. It's an independent team. This is a legit opportunity to get tenure making pubs.