TOOLS OR TOYS? THE IMPACT OF HIGH TECHNOLOGY ON SCHOLARLY PRODUCTIVITY

We examine the impact of communication technology on scholarly productivity by considering patterns of coauthored economics articles. Using articles in three major economics journals from 1970–79 and 1992–96, we find (1) sharp growth from distant coauthorships (authors not in the same metropolitan area prior to publication), as the theory predicts, and, contrary to theory, (2) lower productivity of distant than close-coauthored works and no decline in their relative disadvantage. These findings are reconciled by noting that high technology has aspects of a consumer good. The relative productivity of solo-authored articles has decreased, perhaps explaining the secular increase in coauthorship.     

Timing,togetherness and time windfalls

With appropriate data the analysis of time use, labor supply and leisure can move beyond the standard questions of wage and income elasticities of hours supplied. I present four examples: 1) American data from 1973 through 1997 show that the amount of evening and night work in the U.S. has decreased. 2) The same data demonstrate that workers whose relative earnings increase experience a relative diminution of the burden of work at unpleasant times. 3) U.S. data for the 1970s and 1990s demonstrate that spouses' work schedules are more synchronized than would occur randomly; synchrony among working spouses diminished after the 1970s; and the full-income elasticity of demand for it was higher among wives than among husbands in the 1970s but equal in the 1990s. 4) Dutch time-budget data for 1990 show that the overwhelming majority of the windfall hour that occurred when standard time resumed was used for extra sleep. Received: 6 July 2000/Accepted: 20 January 2001 Daniel S. Hamermesh is Edward Everett Hale Centennial Professor, University of Texas at Austin; research associate, National Bureau of Economic Research, and Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit. I thank the National Science Foundation for support under Grants SBR-9422429 and SES-9904699, and two anonymous referees, Gerard Pfann, the late Lee Lillard, Gerald Oettinger, Steve Trejo and participants at the ESPE Conference and at seminars at the University of Bristol and Warwick University for helpful comments. Responsible editor: Klaus F. Zimmermann.     

How do immigrants spend their time? The process of assimilation

Sharp differences in time use by nativity emerge when activities are distinguished by incidence and intensity in recent US data. A model with daily fixed costs for assimilating activities predicts that immigrants are less likely than natives to undertake such activities on a given day; but those who do will spend relatively more time on them. Activities such as purchasing, education, and market work conform to the model. Other results suggest that fixed costs for assimilating activities are higher for immigrants with poor English proficiency or who originate in less developed countries. An analysis of comparable Australian data yields similar results.     

Total work and gender: facts and possible explanations

Time-diary data from 27 countries show a negative relationship between GDP per-capita and gender differences in total work—for pay and at home. In rich non-Catholic countries, men and women average about the same amount of total work. Survey results show scholars and the general public believe that women work more. Widespread average equality does not arise from gender differences in the price of time, intra-family bargaining or spousal complementarity. Several theories, including ones based on social norms, might explain these findings and are consistent with evidence from the World Values Surveys and microeconomic data from Australia and Germany.     

Life satisfaction,loneliness and togetherness,with an application to Covid-19 lock-downs

Review of Economics of the Household - Using the 2012–2013 American Time Use Survey, I show that both “who” people spend time with and “how” they spend it affect their...