Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/290343 
Year of Publication: 
2024
Series/Report no.: 
I4R Discussion Paper Series No. 117
Publisher: 
Institute for Replication (I4R), s.l.
Abstract: 
This note addresses the questions, concerns, and issues raised in "Understanding cultural persistence and change: a replication of Giuliano and Nunn (2021)." In terms of replicability, all of the tables in Giuliano and Nunn (2021) are correct, and the replication files match the output reported in the tables. In their note, the authors suggest alternative, more-restricted samples (e.g., omitting observations: under five years of age, under 16 years of age, living in rural locations, first or second-generation immigrants, with unmarried spouses, from specific ancestral groups, from the 1930 Census, etc.) and also less-restrictive samples (e.g., including grandchildren in analyses of parent-to-child cultural transmission for households that comprise three generations). We re-explain the logic of our baseline samples and why these samples are the most natural, as well as discuss the issues, complications, and incorrect reasoning associated with the authors' suggested alternatives. We also show, reproducing all relevant tables in full for each alternative raised, that our conclusions do not depend on these decisions.
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.