The research productivity of the AIB Farmer Award finalists

Purpose – This paper aims to analyze the research productivity and impact of the finalists of the AIB best dissertation award, now titled the Buckley and Casson Award, but from 1987 to 2012 the Farmer Award. Specifically, this paper examines whether there is a relationship between winning the best dissertation award and subsequent publication productivity and impact. Relationships between academic institution and institutional geographic location and finalists are also examined. Design/methodology/approach – The paper examines 25 years of citation counts and the number of publications in Google Scholar of Farmer Award winners and finalists of the AIB best dissertation award from inception in 1987 to 2009, with cited publications as a measure of productivity and citations as a measure of impact. Top performers in productivity and impact are identified, and the averages of winners and non-winners are analyzed in aggregate, over time and per year. Data on finalists' institution and geographic location of institution are analyzed to describe the importance of location and institution to the award. Findings – It is found that the overall average citations of the winners of the award is less than that of the non-winners, and that in the large majority of years the non-winners have an average citation count higher than that of the winners. However, taking averages in five year increments shows more mixed results, with non-winners performing better in two periods and winners performing better in two periods, with the remaining period being split as to research productivity and impact. Originality/value – Aggarwal et al. in this journal summarized a variety of data on Farmer Award finalists from the 1990s to gain insights on institutions represented by finalists, the publication record of finalists, and content of dissertations, among other characteristics. This paper updates some of the insights from that paper by examining data on award winners from 1987 to 2013, and adds further insight by examining for the first time cited publications and citation counts winners and non-winners for the same period excluding the last two years.

Feminist approaches to sexuality and law scholarship

Sexuality and Law scholarship is a new and developing field but, like most legal scholarship, it is dominated by masculine concerns and methodologies. This article explains why research that ignores feminist concerns and methodologies will be incomplete and inaccurate, and suggests questions that should be asked of resources to ensure a complete and accurate coverage of the topic.

Dating the Thera (Santorin) eruption: evidence versus poor scholarship, and the end of the low chronology

The date of the Late Bronze Age Minoan eruption of the Thera volcano has provoked much debate among archaeologists, not least in a recent issue of Antiquity (‘Bronze Age catastrophe and modern controversy: dating the Santorini eruption’, March 2014). Here, the authors respond to those recent contributions, citing evidence that closes the gap between the conclusions offered by previous typological, stratigraphic and radiometric dating techniques. They reject the need to choose between alternative approaches to the problem and make a case for the synchronisation of eastern Mediterranean and Egyptian chronologies with agreement on a ‘high’ date in the late seventeenth century BC for the Thera eruption.

Incentive effects on risk attitude in small probability prospects

We report between-subject results on the effect of monetary stakes on risk attitudes. While we find the typical risk seeking for small probabilities, risk seeking is reduced under high stakes. This suggests that utility is not consistently concave.

Risk taking of executives under different incentive contracts: experimental evidence

Classic financial agency theory recommends compensation through stock options rather than shares to counteract excessive risk aversion in agents. In a setting where any kind of risk taking is suboptimal for shareholders, we show that excessive risk taking may occur for one of two reasons: risk preferences or incentives. Even when compensated through restricted company stock, experimental CEOs take large amounts of excessive risk. This contradicts classical financial theory, but can be explained through risk preferences that are not uniform over the probability and outcome spaces, and in particular, risk seeking for small probability gains and large probability losses. Compensation through options further increases risk taking as expected. We show that this effect is driven mainly by the personal asset position of the experimental CEO, thus having deleterious effects on company performance.