Methods matter: p-hacking and publication bias in causal analysis in economics: reply

Abel Brodeur, Nikolai Cook, Anthony Heyes

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debatepeer-review

Abstract

In Brodeur, Cook, and Heyes (2020) we present evidence that instrumental variable (and to a lesser extent difference-in-difference) articles are more p-hacked than randomized controlled trial and regression discontinuity design articles. We also find no evidence that (i) articles published in the top five journals are different; (ii) the “revise and resubmit” process mitigates the problem; (iii) things are improving through time. Kranz and Pütz (2022) apply a novel adjustment to address rounding errors. They successfully replicate our results with the exception of our shakiest finding: after adjusting for rounding errors, bunching of test statistics for difference-in-difference articles is now smaller around the 5 percent level (and coincidentally larger at the 10 percent level). (JEL A14, C12, C52)
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3137-3139
Number of pages3
JournalAmerican Economic Review
Volume112
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sept 2022

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Methods matter: p-hacking and publication bias in causal analysis in economics: reply'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this