Conventional Wisdom, Meta-Analysis, and Research Revision in Economics

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

No njd64_v1, MetaArXiv from Center for Open Science

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: 2024-01-03
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-hpe
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://osf.io/download/6583d479f31e13154b82ddae/

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 (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:osf:metaar:njd64_v1

DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/njd64_v1

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in MetaArXiv from Center for Open Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by OSF ().