"Direct evaluation" track
Direct evaluation of prominent work
In addition to soliciting research submissions by authors, we have a process for sourcing and prioritizing unsubmitted research for evaluation. For some of this research we ask for author engagement but do not require their permission.
Direct evaluation of "prestige work": eligibility rules & guidelines
NBER
All NBER working papers are generally eligible, with .
CEPR
We treat these on a case-by-case basis and use discretion. All CEPR members are reasonably secure and successful, but their co-authors might not be, especially if these co-authors are PhD students they are supervising.
Journal-published papers (i.e., 'post-publication evaluation')
In some areas and fields (e.g., psychology, animal product markets) the publication process is relatively rapid or it may fail to engage general expertise. In general, all papers that are already published in peer-reviewed journals are eligible for our direct track.
(We discuss when we consider post-pub evaluation in Formats, research stage, publication status)
Papers or projects posted in any other working paper (pre-print) series
These are eligible (without author permission) if all authors/all lead authors "have high professional status" or are otherwise less career-sensitive to the consequences of this evaluation.
High professional status/less career-sensitive
We define this (at least for economics) as:
having a tenured or ‘long term’ positions at well-known, respected universities or other research institutions, or
having a tenure-track positions at a top universities (e.g., top-20 globally by some credible ranking) and having published one or more papers in a "top-five-equivalent" journal, or
clearly not pursuing an academic career (e.g., the "partner at the aid agency running the trial").
On the other hand, if one or more authors is a PhD student or an untenured academic outside a "top global program,’’ then we will ask for permission and potentially offer an embargo.
Exceptions to these exceptions
If the PhD student or untenured academic is otherwise clearly extremely high-performing by conventional metrics; e.g., an REStud "tourist" or someone with multiple published papers in top-5 journals. In such cases the paper might be considered eligible for direct evaluation.
See also Direct evaluation of "impactful work"
Direct evaluation of "impactful work"
We will also evaluate work directly, without requiring author permission, where it is clear that this research is already influencing a substantial amount of funding in impact-relevant areas, or substantially influencing policy considerations. Much of this work will be evaluated as part of our "Applied and Policy" Track.
Last updated
Was this helpful?