|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | Courtney Butler; Brett Currier; Kira Lillard |
| Abstract: | For many years, economics researchers have discussed the importance of sharing code and data files to ensure replicability. The discussion, however, rarely includes questions about long-term access to those files. This paper looks in-depth at the code and data policies from top economics journals to understand the guidance provided to researchers regarding data sharing and asks if that guidance supports preservation of code and data files for access and use, long into the future. We used content analysis to review journal policies from 184 economics journals. We discovered that while most journals recommend code and data be released with papers and that a few journals recommend practices consistent with long-term preservation, almost no journals specifically or emphatically consider long-term preservation of those files. |
| Keywords: | Economic Journals; Code Preservation; Data Preservation |
| JEL: | B40 C80 Y8 |
| Date: | 2021–12–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fip:fedkrw:93456&r= |
| By: | Sylvérie Herbert; Hautahi Kingi; Flavio Stanchi; Lars Vilhubern |
| Abstract: | Given the importance of reproducibility for the scientific ethos, more and more journals have pushed for transparency of research through data availability policies. If the introduction and implementation of such data policies improve the availability of researchers' code and data, what is the impact on reproducibility? We describe and present the results of a large reproduction exercise in which we assess the reproducibility of research articles published in the American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, which has implemented a data availability policy since 2005. Our replication success rate is relatively moderate, with 37.78% of replication attempts successful. 68 of 162 eligible replication attempts successfully replicated the article's analysis (41.98%) conditional on non-confidential data. A further 69 (42.59%) were at least partially successful. A total of 98 out of 303 (32.34%) relied on confidential or proprietary data, and were thus not reproducible by this project. We also conduct several bibliometric analyses of reproducible vs. non-reproducible articles and show that replicable papers do not provide citation bonuses for authors. |
| Keywords: | Replication, Reproducibility, Transparency, Replicability, Journal Policies |
| JEL: | B41 C80 C81 C87 C88 |
| Date: | 2021 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:bfr:banfra:853&r= |
| By: | Davis, John B. (Department of Economics Marquette University) |
| Abstract: | This chapter critically evaluates standard economics’ treatment of positive and normative, drawing on Putnam’s (2002) fact-value entanglement argument. It argues that economics is an inherently value-laden discipline but may still be an ‘objective’ one. The means of achieving this is to carry out a programme of value disentanglement that evaluates research approaches according to whether their different value structures are consistent. The method employed assumes that economics and social science disciplines are built around anchor values or normative ideals and additional sets of values concerning what most people in those disciplines see as most valuable and good about human society and characteristic of human nature from the perspective of their disciplines. Since the rise of neoclassicism, in economics the anchor value has been what I term an ‘individual realisation’ ideal. This normative ideal is coupled with values that interpret what individual well-being involves, based on additional values regarding what individuals are. The chapter evaluates the value structures of mainstream economics preferences/utility and the capability conceptions of individuals. The chapter concludes with discussion of different forms of interdisciplinarity and advances a general framework for ethics and economics in an ‘objective’ economics. |
| Keywords: | positive, normative, fact-value entanglement, individual realisation, capability, disciplinarity |
| JEL: | A13 B20 B41 B55 |
| Date: | 2022–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:mrq:wpaper:2022-01&r= |
| By: | Andrea Beller (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign); Shoshana Grossbard (San Diego State University); Ana Fava (Federal University of ABC); Marouane Idmansour (Ecole Nationale de Commerce et de Gestion) |
| Abstract: | In the period 1960-1980 Gary Becker founded workshops for graduate students in economics, first the Labor Workshop at Columbia University and then the Applications of Economics Workshop at the University of Chicago. The workshops fostered novel applications of economics dealing with labor, consumption, household production, household formation, human capital, crime and politics. We document the high proportion of women in these workshops, comparing (1) Columbia to Chicago, (2) the Columbia Labor Workshop over various periods, under the leadership of Becker, Mincer, or both, and (3) the Becker-founded workshops to other workshops at Columbia. We estimate regressions of the odds that a PhD was awarded to a woman for students at Columbia or Chicago who graduated between 1960 and 1980, as a function of whether and when the student participated in a Becker-founded workshop. Tentative explanations are offered for inter-university and period variation in odds that graduates were women. In addition, we compare gender ratios of graduates from Columbia and Chicago, where Becker-founded workshops were available during all or part of the period, with that of students at universities located nearby, NYU and Northwestern, where Becker did not found workshops. |
| Keywords: | graduate education, graduation rates, gender ratios in economics |
| JEL: | A23 A14 J16 |
| Date: | 2021–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hka:wpaper:2021-057&r= |