<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel rdf:about="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/265050">
    <title>EconStor Collection:</title>
    <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/265050</link>
    <description />
    <items>
      <rdf:Seq>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/336819" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/336818" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/336817" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/338630" />
      </rdf:Seq>
    </items>
    <dc:date>2026-04-03T18:51:21Z</dc:date>
  </channel>
  <item rdf:about="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/336819">
    <title>It must be very hard to publish null results</title>
    <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/336819</link>
    <description>Title: It must be very hard to publish null results
Authors: Briggs, Ryan C.; Mellon, Jonathan; Arel-Bundock, Vincent
Abstract: Publication practices in the social sciences act as a filter that favors statistically significant results over null findings. While the problem of selection on significance (SoS) is well-known in theory, it has been difficult to measure its scope empirically, and it has been challenging to determine how selection varies across contexts. In this article, we use large language models to extract granular and validated data on about 100,000 articles published in over 150 political science journals from 2010 to 2024. We show that fewer than 2% of articles that rely on statistical methods report null-only findings in their abstracts, while over 90% of papers highlight significant results. To put these findings in perspective, we develop and calibrate a simple model of publication bias. Across a range of plausible assumptions, we find that statistically significant results are estimated to be one to two orders of magnitude more likely to enter the published record than null results. Leveraging metadata extracted from individual articles, we show that the pattern of strong SoS holds across subfields, journals, methods, and time periods. However, a few factors such as pre-registration and randomized experiments correlate with greater acceptance of null results. We conclude by discussing implications for the field and the potential of our new dataset for investigating other questions about political science.</description>
    <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/336818">
    <title>A comment on "Network formation and efficiency in linear-quadratic games: An experimental study"</title>
    <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/336818</link>
    <description>Title: A comment on "Network formation and efficiency in linear-quadratic games: An experimental study"
Authors: Alapini, Gefry B.; Djima, Jesugnon E.; Zhazhin, Kirill
Abstract: We replicate Horváth (2025), experimentally studying link formation and effort in a linear-quadratic game with positive externalities. Across five treatments, subjects exert 38-97 percent more effort than the Nash benchmark yet create too few links, depressing payoffs. In groups of five, the complete network appears in roughly 25 percent of final rounds (66-76 percent if deviations of ±2 links are allowed); in groups of nine it is almost never reached. Larger groups and lower link costs fail to improve connectivity. Following the original procedures and analysis step-for-step, our replication reproduces the sign, magnitude, and statistical significance of every reported effect. Robustness checks-learning, benefit salience, group benchmarking, alternative clustering, and multiple link-formation specifications- confirm the core pattern: persistent over-provision of effort coupled with under-provision of links, generating substantial efficiency losses.</description>
    <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/336817">
    <title>A Computational and Robustness Reproduction of "Ramadan Fasting Increases Leniency in Judges in Pakistan and India"</title>
    <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/336817</link>
    <description>Title: A Computational and Robustness Reproduction of "Ramadan Fasting Increases Leniency in Judges in Pakistan and India"
Authors: Wu, Victor Y.
Abstract: Mehmood et al. (2023) estimate the effect of Ramadan fasting hours on judicial decisions using case-level data from Pakistan and India. Using exogenous variation in fasting intensity due to the Islamic lunar calendar and latitude, the authors find that Muslim judges are significantly more likely to issue acquittals with longer fasting hours. Their main result, reported in Table 1, shows that each additional hour of fasting beyond the baseline minimum increases acquittal rates by about 10%. I successfully computationally reproduced this main result using the original authors' data and code: I found no coding errors or discrepancies in the replication package, and the point estimates and p-values in my reproduction match those reported in the published article. I then evaluated robustness for the Pakistan sample of judges using three alternative specifications. First, the result is robust to alternative inclusion of control variables: It remains stable and statistically significant whether controlling for case-level covariates, judge-level covariates, both, or none. Second, the effect persists across a different fixed effects specification that includes only district fixed effects. Finally, the result is robust to clustering standard errors at the judge level, although clustering at the month level increases the standard error and renders the estimate statistically insignificant. Overall, the authors' main finding is both computationally reproducible and robust.</description>
    <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/338630">
    <title>Replication Guidance for "Disloyal Managers and Shareholder Wealth"</title>
    <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/338630</link>
    <description>Title: Replication Guidance for "Disloyal Managers and Shareholder Wealth"
Authors: Fich, Elizier M.; Harford, Jarrad; Tran, Anh L.
Abstract: This document provides clarifications and guidance for researchers seeking to replicate the analyses in our paper. This is important as we identified some items in the published text and the code where additional clarity would be helpful. While none of these affect our substantive conclusions, we believe transparency requires that we document them here to facilitate future replication work, avoid confusion, and maintain the integrity of the scientific record. We also take this opportunity to note that updates and data quality issues in standard financial databases (discussed in Section B.1) may complicate replication efforts of our paper as well as others. Replication considerations specific to our paper follow beginning in section B.2.</description>
    <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
</rdf:RDF>

