Others have faculty members who don’t publish in top economics journals.
Stop asking whether your AEJ:Macro will count towards finance tenure. The answer is that if you are publishing in AEJ:Macro, then your finance department will recognize it because you have shown that you belong in the first category.
AEJ: Macro is a fine journal. Hopefully your topics are revant to the field of Finance, which yes, is a sub field of Economics.
Tenure decisions probably will look at a lot of angles. If you do only the type of macro research that has little connection to Finance, I can see you running into difficulty.
It isn't a stupid question to ask.
But a lot of Economics people need to stop looking over their shoulders at the finance people. The pay differential isnt our fault. We recognize top 5 econ journal pubs are special. So are top 3 finance pubs.
Put your ruler away, zip your fly, and get back to work.
OP here. Let me make my point crystal clear:
There are some finance departments (top 75/100/150) where faculty members do not publish in top econ journals, but faculty members convince themselves that their JFQA is as good as AEJ:Macro/JPubE etc. It is NOT.
Chicago,Columbia, and Wharton would take AEJ:Macro over JFQA any day of the week. In any case, I am simply tired of hearing this question. Finance is a subfield, and JFQA is a second tier field journal!
Lots of butthurt finance LRMs/VLRMs/UVLRMs who want to no-good this post. The truth hurts.
OP here. Let me make my point crystal clear:
There are some finance departments (top 75/100/150) where faculty members do not publish in top econ journals, but faculty members convince themselves that their JFQA is as good as AEJ:Macro/JPubE etc. It is NOT.
Chicago,Columbia, and Wharton would take AEJ:Macro over JFQA any day of the week. In any case, I am simply tired of hearing this question. Finance is a subfield, and JFQA is a second tier field journal!
The truth is somewhere in between. Other fields of economics do not have their own departments. There are no labor economics departments or IO departments, but there are finance departments. So no, finance is not just a subfield of economics. It is a very closely related field.
In terms of the quality of the journals in the two fields, I have always thought that it's better to look at papers than to look at journals. There are dreadful pieces of work in the AER and mighty fine pieces of work in the JF. That said, the lower down the food chain you go in both economics and finance, the more your department will glorify lousy journals. It's not just a finance-specific thing.
I agree with OP.
After busting my ass impressing the top macro-finance people in the field and getting a R&R from AEJ:Macro, the last thing I want to hear from my LRM/VLRM department is “Why didn’t you submit it to JFQA?” Bite me, and submit your dumbass mutual fund paper to JFQA.
Not in finance. No good due to overwhelming arrogance.
Lots of butthurt finance LRMs/VLRMs/UVLRMs who want to no-good this post. The truth hurts.
OP here. Let me make my point crystal clear:
There are some finance departments (top 75/100/150) where faculty members do not publish in top econ journals, but faculty members convince themselves that their JFQA is as good as AEJ:Macro/JPubE etc. It is NOT.
Chicago,Columbia, and Wharton would take AEJ:Macro over JFQA any day of the week. In any case, I am simply tired of hearing this question. Finance is a subfield, and JFQA is a second tier field journal!
In the same boat; simply replace macro-finance with banking.
I agree with OP.
After busting my ass impressing the top macro-finance people in the field and getting a R&R from AEJ:Macro, the last thing I want to hear from my LRM/VLRM department is “Why didn’t you submit it to JFQA?” Bite me, and submit your dumbass mutual fund paper to JFQA.
I agree with OP.
After busting my ass impressing the top macro-finance people in the field and getting a R&R from AEJ:Macro, the last thing I want to hear from my LRM/VLRM department is “Why didn’t you submit it to JFQA?” Bite me, and submit your dumbass mutual fund paper to JFQA.
“Why didn’t you submit it to JBF?”
Lots of butthurt finance LRMs/VLRMs/UVLRMs who want to no-good this post. The truth hurts.
OP here. Let me make my point crystal clear:
There are some finance departments (top 75/100/150) where faculty members do not publish in top econ journals, but faculty members convince themselves that their JFQA is as good as AEJ:Macro/JPubE etc. It is NOT.
Chicago,Columbia, and Wharton would take AEJ:Macro over JFQA any day of the week. In any case, I am simply tired of hearing this question. Finance is a subfield, and JFQA is a second tier field journal!
I don't think serious people argue that JFQA is good or that the top econ journals aren't better than top finance journals.
With that said, the top 3 in finance are better than the top fields in any field of economics.
Most papers published in top finance journals were not submitted to a top 5 because the authors just don't submit to top 5s.
Most papers published in top econ field journals were rejected from a top 5.
Hey LRM/VLRM finance people, have you checked the Repec 10-yr recursive discounted rankings? Have you noticed that numerous leaders in your field publish in top economics journals?
If you are in macro-finance, labor-finance, international finance, banking, or pretty much any interdisciplinary finance area; then publishing in a top field is a big deal.
You should not impose your stupid views just because your work in such a narrow area of finance, that it will NEVER be attractive to a general interest audience.
#jfqaisasecondtierfieldjournal
Hey LRM/VLRM finance people, have you checked the Repec 10-yr recursive discounted rankings? Have you noticed that numerous leaders in your field publish in top economics journals?
If you are in macro-finance, labor-finance, international finance, banking, or pretty much any interdisciplinary finance area; then publishing in a top field is a big deal.
You should not impose your stupid views just because your work in such a narrow area of finance, that it will NEVER be attractive to a general interest audience.
#jfqaisasecondtierfieldjournal
If you spend long enough looking at rankings, you can find ones that support your view.
Most rankings, including the Ideas ranking, have the top finance and top econ journals mixed together, with the top econ fields following.
Finance is a large field; and the rankings that simply count citations will flatter the finance journals. The rankings that overweight cross-field citations will not favor the finance journals because many finance paoers are narrow.
I think that the critiques about interdisciplinary work are fair: You are probably better off publishing in a top field journal rather than a second tier field journal like JFQA.
Most rankings, including the Ideas ranking, have the top finance and top econ journals mixed together, with the top econ fields following.
I will take your argument further: Some finance people who “dabble” in other fields often do things incorrectly. They do such a bad job that their crappy papers would never make it in a top econ journal. These papers then end up in a finance journal because finance readers don’t know any better.
I have seem numerous examples of this phenomenon. In fact, some of the top finance scholars will admit that some of their crappiest papers did not fly in the econ journals so they had to submit them to finance journals.
For an interdisciplinary finance scholar, it is a very good signal if your paper is accepted at a top econ journal.
If you are in macro-finance, labor-finance, international finance, banking, or pretty much any interdisciplinary finance area; then publishing in a top field is a big deal.
#jfqaisasecondtierfieldjournal