Methods matter: P-hacking and publication bias in causal analysis in economics
By: Brodeur, A., Cook, N. and Heyes, A
.
Material type: 
BookPublisher: The American Economic Review Description: 110(11), Nov, 2020: p.3634-3660.
In:
The American Economic ReviewSummary: The credibility revolution in economics has promoted causal identification using randomized control trials (RCT), difference-in-differences (DID), instrumental variables (IV) and regression discontinuity design (RDD). Applying multiple approaches to over 21,000 hypothesis tests published in 25 leading economics journals, we find that the extent of p-hacking and publication bias varies greatly by method. IV (and to a lesser extent DID) are particularly problematic. We find no evidence that (i) papers published in the Top 5 journals are different to others; (ii) the journal "revise and resubmit" process mitigates the problem; (iii) things are improving through time. Reproduced
| Item type | Current location | Call number | Vol info | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Articles
|
Indian Institute of Public Administration | 110(11), Nov, 2020: p.3634-3660 | Available | AR124710 |
The credibility revolution in economics has promoted causal identification using randomized control trials (RCT), difference-in-differences (DID), instrumental variables (IV) and regression discontinuity design (RDD). Applying multiple approaches to over 21,000 hypothesis tests published in 25 leading economics journals, we find that the extent of p-hacking and publication bias varies greatly by method. IV (and to a lesser extent DID) are particularly problematic. We find no evidence that (i) papers published in the Top 5 journals are different to others; (ii) the journal "revise and resubmit" process mitigates the problem; (iii) things are improving through time. Reproduced
There are no comments for this item.