We present and discuss a novel dataset on informal collaboration in Financial Economics. The data is derived from acknowledgement sections of papers. We focus on the network of informal collaboration, connecting authors and commenters. The network contains useful information when studying various outcomes (academic productivity, citation count), even above co-author networks. Among other things, we ﬁnd that authors connecting otherwise distinct research communities publish less in top journals, but receive above journal-average citations, and that Female researchers are less often acknowledged than comparable male counterparts. Finally, we list the most central researchers in Financial Economics and study determinants of centrality.
Cite as: Georg, Co-Pierre and Rose, Michael E. (2018): "What 5,000 Acknowledgements Tell Us About Informal Collaboration in Financial Economics", Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Discussion Paper No. 11
When preparing a research article, academics engage in informal intellectual collaboration by asking their colleagues for feedback. This collaboration gives rise to a social network between academics. We study whether informal intellectual collaboration with an academic who is more central in this social network results in a research article having higher scientific impact. To address the well-known reflection problem in estimating network effects, we use the assignment of discussants at NBER summer institutes as a quasi-natural experiment. We show that manuscripts discussed by a discussant with a 10% higher than average Bonacich centrality rank results in 1.4% more citations and a 5% higher probability that an article is published in a top journal. To illustrate our results, we develop a structural model in which a positive externality from intellectual collaboration implies that collaborating with a more central colleague results in larger scientific impact of the research article.
Cite as: Georg, Co-Pierre, Opolot, Daniel C. and Rose, Michael E. (2017): "Informal Intellectual Collaboration with Central Colleagues", Kiel Working Paper 2084