In reply to jkoniecz2. jkoniecz2, let me reply to your long comment by...
I understand the need to distinguish between primary and secondary affiliations, and the fact that the previous system could be gamed. The changes, however, do not succeed and the end result is, ...
One way to proceed is to decouple institutional rankings from individual rankings. In other words let the individuals retain their "world" ranking and have the institutions receive the new amende...
adnotten: Regarding your first point, there is a problem of classifying institutions as "umbrella" and "not umbrella". What objective criterion would you use? What do with people affiliated to th...
Dear Christian, I think there are two problems flowing from the new formula. The first problem is the "virtual"organizations RePEc has tried to rank in a fairer way. Although trying to amend the ...
In reply to tstengos. Tanasios, this is the precise reason why the for...
I think that the new ranking methodology although has corrected some problems in the rankings of "virtual" institutions it has created many more serious anomalies in the rankings of individuals. ...
John, I agree that this would also be a step forward. However, there is nothing in the script that would guarantee that the order of the affiliations is maintained. Also, the affiliation page has...
A simple solution would be to attribute to only the first named institition. This is generally the main institution and would be made so by authors if they knew the rule. The other affiliations w...
I am getting private emails in support of my formula or advocating some amendments. I want this to be a public discussion, so please post here.