Is the Time-Series Evidence on Minimum Wage Effects Contaminated by Publication Bias?

David Neumark and William Wascher

Economic Inquiry, 1998, vol. 36, issue 3, 458-70

Abstract: Existing meta-analysis approaches to testing for publication bias are problematic when applied to time-series studies in economics because changes in parameters can generate spurious evidence of publication bias. The authors suggest an alternative test in such contexts and apply it to time-series studies of the effects of minimum wages on employment. In contrast to recent research by David Card and Alan B. Krueger (1995), they find that the results of published time-series studies of minimum wage effects are consistent with structural change and that the null hypothesis of no publication bias is not rejected by the evidence. Copyright 1998 by Oxford University Press.

Date: 1998
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (17)

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
Working Paper: Is the Time-Series Evidence on Minimum Wage Effects Contaminated by Publication Bias? (1996)
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:oup:ecinqu:v:36:y:1998:i:3:p:458-70

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

Economic Inquiry is currently edited by Preston McAfee

More articles in Economic Inquiry from Western Economic Association International Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().