Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Despite evidence to the contrary, the American Economic Review concluded that all was well with its archive

Bruce D. McCullough

No 2017-78, Economics Discussion Papers from Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel)

Abstract: In 2011, the Annual Report of the Editor of the American Economic Review reported that the journal's data-code archive was functioning well, and made no changes in the archive rules. This was based on an audit of the archive that the editor has commissioned. The audit was performed by a graduate student who apparently had no experience with archives, and the audit concluded that all was largely well with the archive. In point of fact, all was not well with the archive: the archive did not support the publication of reproducible research. The rules for the archive should have been changed and were not; thus the American Economic Review continued to publish articles that were not reproducible. The cause of reproducible research was set back many years.

Keywords: Replication; reproducible research (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: B40 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-hpe
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.economics-ejournal.org/economics/discussionpapers/2017-78
https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/169137/1/898640318.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
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:zbw:ifwedp:201778

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Economics Discussion Papers from Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics ().