Publication Bias and Editorial Statement on Negative Findings

Abel Brodeur and Cristina Blanco-Perez

No xq9nt, MetaArXiv from Center for Open Science

Abstract: In February 2015, the editors of eight health economics journals sent out an editorial statement which aims to reduce the incentives to engage in specification searching and reminds referees to accept studies that: "have potential scientific and publication merit regardless of whether such studies' empirical findings do or do not reject null hypotheses that may be specified." In this study, we collect z-statistics from two health economics journals and compare the distribution of tests before and after the editorial statement. Our results suggest that the editorial statement decreased the proportion of test statistics rejecting the null hypothesis and that incentives may be aligned to promote more transparent research.

Date: 2017-11-28
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-hea and nep-sog
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (10)

Downloads: (external link)
https://osf.io/download/5908c029b83f69024ea8e8a7/

Related works:
Journal Article: Publication Bias and Editorial Statement on Negative Findings (2020)
Working Paper: Publication Bias and Editorial Statement on Negative Findings (2019)
Working Paper: Publication Bias and Editorial Statement on Negative Findings (2019)
Working Paper: Publication Bias and Editorial Statement on Negative Findings (2019)
Working Paper: Publication Bias and Editorial Statement on Negative Findings (2017)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:osf:metaar:xq9nt

DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/xq9nt

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in MetaArXiv from Center for Open Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by OSF ().