Co-authorship and the output of academic economists

207 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in Economics: Measurement, Uses and Impacts (2018, result): “These findings are consistent with those of Hollis (2001), who measured production by the impact factors of the journals where the articles appear, and Medoff (2003), who used citations to individual articles published in 1990.”
Does Co‐authorship Lead to Higher Academic Productivity? (2015, unknown): “3 The negative effect found in previous studies can be explained by the following reasons: (i) As Hollis (2001) points out, other factors like the increase in salary through collaboration (when individual departments do not discount for promotion articles by the number of authors), risk…”
Life Cycle and Cohort Productivity in Economic Research: The Case of Germany (2008, unknown): “There is a small literature on the topic of co-authorship; see, for example, Hollis (2001), Laband (2002), McDowell and Smith (1992) and Sutter and Kocher (2004).”
Academic honors and performance (2014, methodology): “In the first pool, we also include researchers who later become John Bates Clark Medalists, thereby avoiding a selection based on individual characteristics from ex-post information.”
Collaboration and psychological ownership: how does the tension between the two influence perceived learning? (2011, background): “The rationale for co-authoring an academic piece is that co-authoring elevates the quality of the product (e.g., Hollis 2001 ).”