Selection by Publication in Economics

According to the dominant view, the quality of individual scientific papers can be evaluated by the standard of the journal in which they are published. This paper attempts to demonstrate the limits of this view in the field of economics. According to our main findings, a publication frequently serves as a signal of high professional standards rather than as a source of information; referees and editors frequently reject good papers and accept bad ones; citation indices only partially balance the distortions deriving from the selection process; there are essential “entry costs” to the publication process. Moreover, financial interests of publishers may contradict scientific interests. As long as leading economists do not give voice to their dissatisfaction, there is no hope for any reform of the selection process