Sunday, March 11, 2012

"What his résumé lacked was five bad papers"

Richard H. Thaler, a former colleague at Cornell and another contributor to the Economic View column, once remarked about an unsuccessful candidate for a faculty position, “What his résumé lacked was five bad papers.” By that, he meant that while the candidate had published several papers containing enough genuinely important ideas to satisfy any rational hiring committee — more than could be said of most faculty members — he had too few to satisfy the bean counters, who fretted about how uninformed outsiders might react to the appointment.

Researchers have responded as expected to these incentives. But the additional papers they’ve written have added little value. The economist Philip Cook and I found, for example, that in the first five years after publication, many fewer than half of all papers in the two most selective economics journals had ever been cited by other scholars.

From Robert Frank's column on rising college costs.

1 comment:

  1. Somewhat related to your second link are these analyses by Professor Steve Hsu:

    http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2011/01/credentialism-and-elite-employment.html


    http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2011/01/credentialism-and-elite-performance.html

    ReplyDelete

Would you like to comment on this post (or, in response to one of the comments)? If so, please note:

1. This blog does not allow anonymous comments (any more), so please use an open-id account to comment.

2. Comments on posts older than 15 days go into a moderation queue, and may take some time to appear.

Thank you for joining the conversation. Have your say: