Write in a clean editor, then format for Journal of the History of Economic Thought in one click — DocuGuru applies the official Cambridge University Press template with numbered references and exports a submission-ready PDF plus the editable LaTeX source. Free to start.
Journal of the History of Economic Thought is a peer-reviewed journal published by Cambridge University Press, covering Economic Theory and Institutions, Economic Theory and Policy, Political Economy and Marxism.
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press |
|---|---|
| Reference style | Numbered Numbered — [1], [2] in the text [1] A. Smith, B. Jones, and C. Lee, A representative article title, Journal of the History of Economic Thought 12 (2023) 45–58.
Formats any DOI in the closest standard style — Journal of the History of Economic Thought has no published style definition, so this is an approximation. No sign-up. |
| Publishes research in | Economic Theory and Institutions Economic Theory and Policy Political Economy and Marxism Diverse Scientific and Economic Studies Historical Economic and Social Studies |
| ISSN | 1053-8372 |
| Citation impact (2-yr) | 0.19 |
| h-index | 40 |
| i10-index | 305 |
| Total citations | 10,868 |
| Top institutions publishing here | Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne |
| Journal website | www.cambridge.org |
| You get | A submission-ready PDF and the editable LaTeX source — ready to submit. |
Citations each year’s papers have accumulated so far — the most recent years are still building up.
The thesis that economics is “performative” (Callon 1998) has provoked much interest but also some puzzlement and not a little confusion. The purpose of this article is to examine from the viewpoint of performativity one of the most successful areas of modern economics, the theory of options, and in so doing hopefully to clarify some…
The term “neoclassical economics” was born in 1900; in this paper I am proposing economist-assisted terminasia; by the powers vested in me as president of the History of Economics Society, I hereby declare the term neoclassical economics dead. Let me be clear about what I am sentencing to death—it is not the content of neoclassical…
Something happened to economics in the decade of the 1950s that is little appreciated by most economists and even by professional historians of economic thought. The subject went through an intellectual revolution as profound in its impact as the so-called Keynesian Revolution of pre-war years. I call it the Formalist Revolution after Ward (1972, pp.…
Economists suffer badly from what we might call “Cliophobia.” Why bother with the history of economic thought?, they ask. Why not just do economics? What is the point of constantly recalling the inadequate economics of yesterday instead of improving the economics of today and tomorrow?
Scholars have long been interested in the apparent dichotomy between sympathy and self-interest in Smith. The question of the consistency between The Theory of Moral Sentiments (TMS) and An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (WN)—the famous Das Adam Smith Problem —is definitely still relevant for anyone attracted to Smith…
