Conventional wisdom, meta‐analysis, and research revision in economics

Sebastian Gechert, Bianka Mey, Matej Opatrny, Tomas Havranek, T. D. Stanley, Pedro R. D. Bom, Hristos Doucouliagos, Philipp Heimberger, Zuzana Irsova and Heiko J. Rachinger

Journal of Economic Surveys, 2025, vol. 39, issue 3, 980-999

Abstract: Over the past several decades, meta‐analysis has emerged as a widely accepted tool to understand economics research. Meta‐analyses often challenge the established conventional wisdom of their respective fields. We systematically review a wide range of influential meta‐analyses in economics and compare them to “conventional wisdom.” After correcting for observable biases, the empirical economic effects are typically much closer to zero and sometimes switch signs. Typically, the relative reduction in effect sizes is 45%–60%.

Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12630

Related works:
Working Paper: Conventional Wisdom, Meta-Analysis, and Research Revision in Economics (2024)
Working Paper: Conventional Wisdom, Meta-Analysis, and Research Revision in Economics (2024)
Working Paper: Conventional Wisdom, Meta-Analysis, and Research Revision in Economics (2023)
Working Paper: Conventional Wisdom, Meta-Analysis, and Research Revision in Economics (2023)
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:bla:jecsur:v:39:y:2025:i:3:p:980-999

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0950-0804

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Economic Surveys from Wiley Blackwell
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().