 The Other Transformation in Econometric Practice: Robust Tools for InferenceJames H. Stock Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2010, vol. 24, issue 2, 83-94 Abstract: Angrist and Pischke highlight one aspect of the research that has positively transformed econometric practice and teaching. They emphasize the rise of experiments and quasi-experiments as credible sources of identification in microeconometric studies, which they usefully term "design-based research." But in so doing, they miss an important part of the story: a second research strand aimed at developing tools for inference that are robust to subsidiary modeling assumptions. My first aim in these remarks therefore is to highlight some key developments in this area. I then turn to Angrist and Pischke's call for adopting experiments and quasi-experiments in macroeconometrics; while sympathetic, I suspect the scope for such studies is limited. I conclude with some observations on the current debate about whether experimental methods have gone too far in abandoning economic theory. JEL-codes: B41 C01 (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aea:jecper:v:24:y:2010:i:2:p:83-94 Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from Access Statistics for this article Journal of Economic Perspectives is currently edited by Enrico Moretti More articles in Journal of Economic Perspectives from American Economic Association Contact information at EDIRC. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.