IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cen/wpaper/23-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Registered Report: Exploratory Analysis of Ownership Diversity and Innovation in the Annual Business Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Timothy R. Wojan

Abstract

A lack of transparency in specification testing is a major contributor to the replicability crisis that has eroded the credibility of findings for informing policy. How diversity is associated with outcomes of interest is particularly susceptible to the production of nonreplicable findings given the very large number of alternative measures applied to several policy relevant attributes such as race, ethnicity, gender, or foreign-born status. The very large number of alternative measures substantially increases the probability of false discovery where nominally significant parameter estimates—selected through numerous though unreported specification tests—may not be representative of true associations in the population. The purpose of this registered report is to: 1) select a single measure of ownership diversity that satisfies explicit, requisite axioms; 2) split the Annual Business Survey (ABS) into an exploratory sample (35%) used in this analysis and a confirmatory sample (65%) that will be accessed only after the publication of this report; 3) regress self-reported new-to-market innovation on the diversity measure along with industry and firm-size controls; 4) pass through those variables meeting precision and magnitude criteria for hypothesis testing using the confirmatory sample; and 5) document the full set of hypotheses to be tested in the final analysis along with a discussion of the false discovery and family-wise error rate corrections to be applied. The discussion concludes with the added value of implementing split sample designs within the Federal Statistical Research Data Center system where access to data is strictly controlled.

Suggested Citation

  • Timothy R. Wojan, 2023. "Registered Report: Exploratory Analysis of Ownership Diversity and Innovation in the Annual Business Survey," Working Papers 23-11, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
  • Handle: RePEc:cen:wpaper:23-11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www2.census.gov/library/working-papers/2023/adrm/ces/CES-WP-23-11.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2023
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael L. Anderson & Jeremy Magruder, 2017. "Split-Sample Strategies for Avoiding False Discoveries," NBER Working Papers 23544, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Katherine Casey & Rachel Glennerster & Edward Miguel, 2012. "Reshaping Institutions: Evidence on Aid Impacts Using a Preanalysis Plan," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 127(4), pages 1755-1812.
    3. Heller, Ruth & Rosenbaum, Paul R. & Small, Dylan S., 2009. "Split Samples and Design Sensitivity in Observational Studies," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 104(487), pages 1090-1101.
    4. Sen, Amartya K, 1976. "Poverty: An Ordinal Approach to Measurement," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 44(2), pages 219-231, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Katherine Casey & Rachel Glennerster & Edward Miguel & Maarten Voors, 2023. "Skill Versus Voice in Local Development," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 105(2), pages 311-326, March.
    2. Josephson, Anna & Michler, Jeffrey D., 2018. "Viewpoint: Beasts of the field? Ethics in agricultural and applied economics," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1-11.
    3. Haseeb, Muhammad & Vyborny, Kate, 2022. "Data, discretion and institutional capacity: Evidence from cash transfers in Pakistan," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    4. Sarah A. Janzen & Jeffrey D. Michler, 2021. "Ulysses' pact or Ulysses' raft: Using pre‐analysis plans in experimental and nonexperimental research," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(4), pages 1286-1304, December.
    5. Susan Athey & Guido Imbens, 2016. "The Econometrics of Randomized Experiments," Papers 1607.00698, arXiv.org.
    6. Edward Miguel, 2021. "Evidence on Research Transparency in Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 35(3), pages 193-214, Summer.
    7. Chakravarty, Satya R. & Deutsch, Joseph & Silber, Jacques, 2008. "On the Watts Multidimensional Poverty Index and its Decomposition," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 1067-1077, June.
    8. Borooah, Vani, 2007. "Measuring economic inequality: deprivation, economising and possessing," MPRA Paper 19422, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Marcel Fafchamps & Julien Labonne, 2017. "Do Politicians’ Relatives Get Better Jobs? Evidence from Municipal Elections," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(2), pages 268-300.
    10. Hendrik Thiel & Stephan L. Thomsen, 2015. "Individual Poverty Paths and the Stability of Control-Perception," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 794, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    11. Kahsay, Goytom Abraha & Medhin, Haileselassie, 2020. "Leader turnover and forest management outcomes: Micro-level evidence from Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    12. Belhadj, Besma & Limam, Mohamed, 2012. "Unidimensional and multidimensional fuzzy poverty measures: New approach," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 995-1002.
    13. repec:pru:wpaper:8 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Duclos, Jean-Yves & Araar, Abdelkrim & Giles, John, 2010. "Chronic and transient poverty: Measurement and estimation, with evidence from China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 266-277, March.
    15. Russell Davidson & Jean-Yves Duclos, 2000. "Statistical Inference for Stochastic Dominance and for the Measurement of Poverty and Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(6), pages 1435-1464, November.
    16. Temple, Jonathan & Ying, Huikang, 2014. "Life During Structural Transformation," CEPR Discussion Papers 10297, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Becerra, Oscar & Cavallo, Eduardo & Noy, Ilan, 2015. "Where is the money? Post-disaster foreign aid flows," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(5), pages 561-586, October.
    18. Gaurav Datt & Martin Ravallion, 1998. "Farm productivity and rural poverty in India," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(4), pages 62-85.
    19. Eric W. Djimeu, 2014. "Does social action fund promote schooling in conflict affected countries? Mixed evidence from Angola," HiCN Working Papers 189, Households in Conflict Network.
    20. Vito Peragine & Ernesto Savaglio & Stefano Vannucci, 2008. "Poverty Rankings of Opportunity Profiles," Department of Economics University of Siena 548, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    21. Maki Michinaka & Takahiro Ito, 2010. "Multidimensional Poverty Rankings based on Pareto Principle: A Practical Extension," Global COE Hi-Stat Discussion Paper Series gd10-139, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Split-sample; false discovery; self-reported innovation; women and minority owned business; hypothesis testing;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights
    • J15 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Minorities, Races, Indigenous Peoples, and Immigrants; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cen:wpaper:23-11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dawn Anderson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesgvus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.