Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/319307 
Year of Publication: 
2024
Citation: 
[Journal:] Economic Inquiry [ISSN:] 1465-7295 [Volume:] 63 [Issue:] 2 [Publisher:] Wiley [Place:] Hoboken, NJ [Year:] 2024 [Pages:] 463-485
Publisher: 
Wiley, Hoboken, NJ
Abstract: 
This paper reviews the impact of replications published as comments in the American Economic Review between 2010 and 2020. We examine their citations and influence on the original papers' (OPs) subsequent citations. Our results show that comments are barely cited, and they do not affect the OP's citations—even if the comment diagnoses substantive problems. Furthermore, we conduct an opinion survey among replicators and authors and find that there often is no consensus on whether the OP's contribution sustains. We conclude that the economics literature does not self‐correct, and that robustness and replicability are hard to define in economics.
Subjects: 
citations
meta‐science
replication
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by-nc-nd Logo
Document Type: 
Article
Document Version: 
Published Version

Files in This Item:
File
Size





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