IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jecsur/v38y2024i5p1567-1592.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Selective and (mis)leading economics journals: Meta‐research evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Zohid Askarov
  • Anthony Doucouliagos
  • Hristos Doucouliagos
  • T. D. Stanley

Abstract

We assess statistical power and excess statistical significance among 31 leading economics general interest and field journals using 22,281 parameter estimates from 368 distinct areas of economics research. Median statistical power in leading economics journals is very low (only 7%), and excess statistical significance is quite high (19%). Power this low and excess significance this high raise serious doubts about the credibility of economics research. We find that 26% of all reported results have undergone some process of selection for statistical significance and 56% of statistically significant results were selected to be statistically significant. Selection bias is greater at the top five journals, where 66% of statistically significant results were selected to be statistically significant. A large majority of empirical evidence reported in leading economics journals is potentially misleading. Results reported to be statistically significant are about as likely to be misleading as not (falsely positive) and statistically nonsignificant results are much more likely to be misleading (falsely negative). We also compare observational to experimental research and find that the quality of experimental economic evidence is notably higher.

Suggested Citation

  • Zohid Askarov & Anthony Doucouliagos & Hristos Doucouliagos & T. D. Stanley, 2024. "Selective and (mis)leading economics journals: Meta‐research evidence," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5), pages 1567-1592, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jecsur:v:38:y:2024:i:5:p:1567-1592
    DOI: 10.1111/joes.12598
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12598
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/joes.12598?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:bla:jecsur:v:38:y:2024:i:5:p:1567-1592. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0950-0804 .

    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.