Did I Misrepresent Life at GMU?


In the comments section of my last post George Mason University economist Peter Boettke links to a post of his own as "an alternative [i.e., more accurate] description" of GMU eocnomics (a.k.a. "Masonomics"):
Masonomics is about bold scholarship and a commitment to communicate the results of that research to widest possible audience of peers in economics and the social sciences and where appropriate to the policy community and the general public. It is NOT about public discourse alone. [...] But our economics department is defined by our research and graduate education activities.

[...] Relevance is indeed a virtue for Masonomics, but that relevance is based on the hard thinking tested by harsh criticism that can be found not at blogs and entertaining lunches, but in our classrooms, seminar discussions, and peer reviewed journals and university presses.
In peer reviewed journals? Oh yes:
Look at the CV of my colleagues such as Thomas Stratmann, Dan Houser, Roger Congleton, Richard Wagner, Charles Rowley, and of course Pete Leeson. These CVs are peppered with hits in the AER, JPE, APSR, AJPS, JLE and JLS, as well as the leading outlets in the research areas of Austrian economics, public choice, law and economics, and history of economic thought. Look at the citation pattern of my colleagues, look at their productivity in terms of articles per year, and look at the placement in high impact journals as well as leading field journals.
To which I say: Pfffft! And: Bah! That's because I know that GMU economists are given special treatment by the leading journals. Below is a document from my secret vaults which I present to the public for the first time here:

George Mason University economist [name redacted] (center)
possible revisions to his manuscript with JPE editors

I think that should settle the matter.

No comments: