Reply to “A Replication of ‘Political Influence Behind the Veil of Peer Review’ (Journal of Law and Economics 2009)â€

Deepak Hegde

Public Finance Review, 2016, vol. 44, issue 6, 818-820

Abstract: In this reply, I commented on Hannum’s (this issue) replication of Hegde and of Hegde and Mowery. I conclude that, in his eagerness to show us wrong, Hannum appears to have committed exactly the wrong that replication exercises are meant to right.

Keywords: NIH funding; political influence; panel data; replication study (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1091142115605376 (text/html)

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:sae:pubfin:v:44:y:2016:i:6:p:818-820

DOI: 10.1177/1091142115605376

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Public Finance Review
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().