Joshua Gans

by Joshua Gans

Reposted by Joshua Gans

by Joshua Gans

Reposted by Joshua Gans

by Joshua Gans

by Joshua Gans — Reposted by Ajay Agrawal

by Joshua Gans

by Joshua Gans — Reposted by Kris Inwood

Joshua Gans

@joshgans.bsky.social

Joel Mokyr won a Nobel prize today for showing that it isn’t enough to have inventions that work. You have to know how they work to have sustained growth. Think about that when you hear AI scientists continue to speculate but aren’t sure as to how generative AI models work.

4 29

by Joshua Gans

Reposted by Joshua Gans, Hanno Lustig, Mika Maliranta , and 1 more Joshua Gans, Hanno Lustig, Mika Maliranta, Nicola Giocoli

Reposted by Joshua Gans

Ethan Mollick

@emollick.bsky.social

AI is apparently already accelerating science as a co-intelligence.

Measuring academic publications of authors: “we find that productivity among GenAI users rose by 15 percent in 2023 relative to non-users and further increased to 36 percent in 2024” and the quality of publications also went up.

8 17 79

Reposted by Joshua Gans

by Joshua Gans

by Joshua Gans — Reposted by Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham

Joshua Gans

@joshgans.bsky.social

Kevin Bryan has a whole suite of tools. He even reinvented PowerPoint. www.kevinbryanecon.com/tools.html

Kevin A. Bryan - Tools

www.kevinbryanecon.com

1 2 9

by Joshua Gans

Reposted by Joshua Gans

by Joshua Gans

Joshua Gans

@joshgans.bsky.social

Or just have them write the paper and cut out the intermediary.

2

Reposted by Joshua Gans

by Joshua Gans

Joshua Gans

@joshgans.bsky.social

So I just want to shout out to the referee reports I received that raised issues and even though they were negative caused me to be more energised and motivated about improving my paper. This is what service to the profession is.

1 1 17

by Joshua Gans

Joshua Gans

@joshgans.bsky.social

This is feedback you rarely get following, say, seminars which for all the complaints in economics are often more superficial than a deep reading of a paper. Although you do often get from a good conference discussion.

1 3

by Joshua Gans

Joshua Gans

@joshgans.bsky.social

But … the reviewing process itself can be extraordinarily helpful. Ideally, some come to your work fresh, delve into it deeply, and determine where it is persuasive, wrong, or somewhere in between.

1 3

by Joshua Gans

Joshua Gans

@joshgans.bsky.social

These days we tend to see the review process as a gatekeeping function — keep out the bad and let in the good. And many referees do believe their role is to keep the gate. And with my 1994 JEP on rejections, I have surely helped reinforce that role.

1 2

by Joshua Gans — Reposted by Miles Corak

Joshua Gans

@joshgans.bsky.social

I just received a rejection from a top journal and I am pleased. Let me explain as it is a testament to our system of peer review.

2 1 24

References

Fields & subjects