Trends in economic-journal literature: 1969–89
This paper has presented a descriptive analysis of the shifting patterns of productive output and topical coverage in the economic-journal literature over the last two decades. Summary results suggest that research interests have not been stagnant. In fact, the analysis reveals that economists' research interests have tended to shift direction as society's economic problems change.
The economics profession is still productive, with growth rates in research output similar to those prior to 1968. Also, the increase in the incidence of co-authorship suggests that perhaps we are smart enough to exploit comparative advantages. The profession's research output is probably best described by a saying credited to Jacob Viner, “Economics is what economists do.” One can safely state that this definition has not significantly changed.
KeywordsGrowth Rate Research Interest Descriptive Analysis Productive Output International Economic
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Martin Bronfenbrenner, “Trends, Cycles, and Fads in Economic Writing,”American Economic Review, May 1966, 56, pp. 538–52.Google Scholar
- Kenneth J. Button, “The Economic Analysis of Economic Literature: A Survey,”American Economist, Fall 1981, pp. 36–43.Google Scholar
- A. W. Coats, “The Role of Scholarly Journals in the History of Economics: An Essay,”Journal of Economic Literature, 1971, 9, pp. 29–44.Google Scholar
- David Colander, “Research on the Economics Profession,”Journal of Economic Perspectives, Fall 1989, 9, pp. 137–48.Google Scholar
- Charles C. Holt and William E. Schrank, “Growth of the Professional Literature in Economics and Other Fields, and Some Implications,”American Documentation, January 1968, 19, pp. 18–26.Google Scholar