Journal of Economic Psychology remains the leading journal in behavioral economics and economic psychology

Last year, the Journal of Economic Psychology became the leading journal in behavioral economics and economic psychology according to the Impact Factors for scientific journals (see last year’s post). This year, we have consolidated this position and even increased the difference. See the graph below! The Journal of Economic Psychology‘s Impact Factor is now 3.5 (Journal Citation Reports, two-year citation window, reference year 2022). It is up from 3.0 last year and 2.0 two years ago. For comparison, we are clearly ahead of excellent journals as Experimental Economics (IF of 2.3, last year 2.4) and Judgment and Decision Making (IF of 2.5, unchanged from last year). Other thematically-related journals that we compare ourselves to are Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization (JEBO: IF 2.2, last year 2.0), Journal of Behavioral Decision Making (JBDM: IF 2.0, last year 2.5), Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (JBEE: IF 1.6, last year 1.8), and Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics (JNPE: IF 0.7, last year 1.3). Those are all good journals, and we have good friends in their boards. But, with apologies for boasting, we remain the leader of the pack. Thanks are due to all our Associate Editors, reviewers, and of course authors, who have made the journal’s success possible.

Open Letter to JoEP Authors, Part IV: Are you familiar with our journal?

This is the fourth entry in a short guide for prospective authors of the Journal of Economic Psychology. The first entry contained a short overview. The second discussed which papers are appropriate for the journal. The third reviewed the big “red flags,” in terms of journal policies. This one tackles familiarity with the journal.

As I stated in previous entries, we are not a “general interest” journal, and we do not wish to become one. We are not exchangeable with other journals, not even within the broad fields of behavioral economics and economic psychology. We are interdisciplinary. Our readership spans both economics and psychology, and is made up of researchers interested in both. We have standards, and we follow through on certain subfields and research agendas, from behavioral biases, decision processes, or the effects of personality on economic decisions to self-control or tax compliance. We do expect prospective authors to be familiar with our journal, and very especially with related publications in our journal.

Journal of Economic Psychology is the leading journal in behavioral economics (and economic psychology)

The new Impact Factors for scientific journals have just been published (Journal Citation Reports, two-year citation window, reference year 2021). The Journal of Economic Psychology has jumped up to an IF of 3.00 (from 2.04 last year and 1.72 two years ago). With apologies for boasting, we are now the leader of the pack in behavioral economics, economic psychology, and judgment and decision making, having surpassed excellent journals as Experimental Economics (IF of 2.39, last year 2.37) and Judgment and Decision Making (IF of 2.5, last year 2.54). As in previous years, we are ahead of thematically-related journals as JEBO (IF 2.00, last year 1.64), JBEE (IF 1.83, last year 1.38), and JNPE (IF 1.28). We have also surpassed solid journals as the Journal of Behavioral Decision Making (IF 2.508). See the graph!

Surveys and Reviews at JoEP

At JoEP, we love Review Articles. We have a special category for them, we allow them to be longer than standard articles, and we try to expedite their handling. Yet, we are currently desk-rejecting most of the reviews/surveys we receive. Why?

There seems to be an expectations mismatch. Regrettably, many of the Review Article submissions that we currently receive follow a mechanical, mainly bibliometric approach. They address topics as how much has it been published on the topic, who has published it, country affiliations, which keywords are used, etc. This is very interesting for bibliometrics (which is a research field on its own), but it is not interesting for us. At all. Sorry!

New Impact Factor for the Journal of Economic Psychology

The new two-year journal Impact Factors have been released. Our journal’s 2020 impact factor has increased (again) and cracked the 2.0 mark. Specifically, we are up to 2.037, from 1.718 in 2019 and 1.561 in 2018. As a comparison, other journals publishing in behavioral economics are behind us (JEBO, 1.635; JBEE, 1.382), and we are also ahead of AEJ: Micro (1.872), Journal of Risk and Uncertainty (1.723), and Games and Economic Behavior (1.278). We are catching up to Experimental Economics (2.367), J&DM (2.543), and JBDM (2.438).

Updated Aims and Scope for the Journal of Economic Psychology

We have updated the Aims and Scope for JoEP:

The Journal of Economic Psychology aims to present research that will improve understanding of behavioral, in particular psychological, aspects of economic decisions and processes. It is published under the auspices of the International Association for Research in Economic Psychology, whose aim is to promote interdisciplinary work relating to economic behavior.

Rejected due to lack of reviewers

Today, for the first time since I became Editor of the Journal of Economic Psychology, I rejected a paper due to lack of reviewers.

This was a very sad thing to do. I saw promise in the paper (which was actually a Brief Report) and thought it would be interesting, but of course that is not how peer reviewing works. Without the support and review of peers, a paper cannot be evaluated. If a large number of natural reviewer candidates decline, at some point I cannot keep the authors waiting, and I have to take the hint that there is insufficient interest on the paper.

Sadly, this will most likely happen more and more in the future. And it might happen to any of us.

Changes at JoEP

There are a few changes in the horizon at the Journal of Economic Psychology.

First, effective January 1st, we are giving up double-blind reviewing. This method has become quite ineffective in a time when working papers can be found online at a keystroke. It is also a source of errors, delays, and incompatibilities of all types. So we are switching to single-blind reviewing (anonymous reviewers but known author identities), as most journals in our broad area. As soon as this change is implemented, we will be able to move forward on different fronts.

“Return to author” at JoEP

As I have written before, roughly three quarters of all submissions to the Journal of Economic Psychology are currently desk-rejected. Roughly half or more of those which are not desk-rejected, however, are returned to author(s). Wait, what?

Avoiding desk rejections at JoEP

In the four months and change in which I have been (sole) Editor in Chief of the Journal of Economic Psychology, I have handled over 200 new submissions.

Around 75% have been desk-rejected.

Harsh? Not necessarily. The journal typically publishes less than a hundred papers per year, but receives around 700 submissions and growing. Also, the published papers include a variable number of special issues which are handled by guest editors. That is, far more than 75% of all regular submissions will be ultimately rejected. This is not different in other journals.

The reasoning for desk-rejections is simple.