IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/polgne/359232.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Czy departamenty badań ekonomicznych banków centralnych są narażone na myślenie grupowe w obszarze polityki pieniężnej? – przykład realizacji celu inflacyjnego

Author

Listed:
  • Rybacki, Jakub

Abstract

In the recent years, the a great vast majority of the world’s central banks have globally failed to realize meet their inflation targets. We attempt to answer a question of determine whether such this failure resulted from insufficient inadequate organization organisation of economic research in those institutions. Our study shows a positive, but statistically weak, relationship between these two issues aspects. However, the analysis finds also finds a few several adverse irregularities in how research is organised in major central banks’s. research organizations. The research of the U.S. Federal Reserve, the Bundesbank, and the Bank of England are is relatively less diversified compared tothan that of the European Central Bank. In the cases of Poland and Italy, central bank economic departments are dominated by groups of researchers focused on a narrow range of topics. On the other hand, the organization organisation of research departments in France and Canada supports a greater variety of topics and independence of researchers.

Suggested Citation

  • Rybacki, Jakub, 2020. "Czy departamenty badań ekonomicznych banków centralnych są narażone na myślenie grupowe w obszarze polityki pieniężnej? – przykład realizacji celu inflacyjnego," Gospodarka Narodowa-The Polish Journal of Economics, Szkoła Główna Handlowa w Warszawie / SGH Warsaw School of Economics, vol. 2020(4), December.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:polgne:359232
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.359232
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/359232/files/Rybacki.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.359232?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Beyer, Karl M. & Pühringer, Stephan, 2019. "Divided we stand? Professional consensus and political conflict in academic economics," Working Paper Serie des Instituts für Ökonomie Ök-51, Hochschule für Gesellschaftsgestaltung (HfGG), Institut für Ökonomie.
    2. Frey, Bruno S, 2003. "Publishing as Prostitution?--Choosing between One's Own Ideas and Academic Success," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 116(1-2), pages 205-223, July.
    3. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2010. "The Credibility Revolution in Empirical Economics: How Better Research Design Is Taking the Con out of Econometrics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(2), pages 3-30, Spring.
    4. de Haan, J. & Eijffinger, Sylvester, 2016. "The Politics of Central Bank Independence," Discussion Paper 2016-047, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    5. Zacharias Maniadis & Fabio Tufano & John A. List, 2017. "To Replicate or Not To Replicate? Exploring Reproducibility in Economics through the Lens of a Model and a Pilot Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(605), pages 209-235, October.
    6. Christina D. Romer & David H. Romer, 2008. "The FOMC versus the Staff: Where Can Monetary Policymakers Add Value?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(2), pages 230-235, May.
    7. Daniele Fanelli, 2010. "Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists' Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(4), pages 1-7, April.
    8. Tillmann, Peter, 2011. "Strategic forecasting on the FOMC," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 547-553, September.
    9. de Haan, J. & Eijffinger, Sylvester, 2016. "The Politics of Central Bank Independence," Discussion Paper 2016-047, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    10. John E Silvia, 2012. "The Biases that Limit Our Thinking about the Economic Outlook and Policy☆," Business Economics, Palgrave Macmillan;National Association for Business Economics, vol. 47(4), pages 297-301, November.
    11. Apel, Mikael & Claussen, Carl Andreas & Lennartsdotter, Petra, 2010. "Picking the Brains of MPC Members," Working Paper Series 237, Sveriges Riksbank (Central Bank of Sweden).
    12. John Ioannidis & Chris Doucouliagos, 2013. "What'S To Know About The Credibility Of Empirical Economics?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(5), pages 997-1004, December.
    13. Zacharias Maniadis & Fabio Tufano & John A. List, 2017. "To Replicate or Not To Replicate? Exploring Reproducibility in Economics through the Lens of a Model and a Pilot Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(605), pages 209-235, October.
    14. Nees Jan van Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2009. "How to normalize cooccurrence data? An analysis of some well‐known similarity measures," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(8), pages 1635-1651, August.
    15. Nees Jan van Eck & Ludo Waltman & Rommert Dekker & Jan van den Berg, 2010. "A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: Multidimensional scaling and VOS," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(12), pages 2405-2416, December.
    16. Ellis, Michael A. & Liu, Dandan, 2016. "FOMC forecasts and monetary policy deliberations," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 131-134.
    17. Anand M. Goel & Anjan V. Thakor, 2008. "Overconfidence, CEO Selection, and Corporate Governance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(6), pages 2737-2784, December.
    18. van Eck, N.J.P. & Waltman, L., 2009. "How to Normalize Co-Occurrence Data? An Analysis of Some Well-Known Similarity Measures," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2009-001-LIS, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jakub Rybacki, 2020. "Are Central Banks’ Research Teams Fragile Because of Groupthink in the Area of Monetary Policy? – Evidence on Inflation Targeting," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 4, pages 81-103.
    2. Jakub Rybacki, 2019. "Are Central Banks' Research Teams Fragile Because of Groupthink?," KAE Working Papers 2019-045, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis.
    3. Cathelijn J. F. Waaijer & Cornelis A. Bochove & Nees Jan Eck, 2011. "On the map: Nature and Science editorials," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(1), pages 99-112, January.
    4. María Pinto & Rosaura Fernández-Pascual & David Caballero-Mariscal & Dora Sales, 2020. "Information literacy trends in higher education (2006–2019): visualizing the emerging field of mobile information literacy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1479-1510, August.
    5. Sara Sassetti & Giacomo Marzi & Vincenzo Cavaliere & Cristiano Ciappei, 2018. "Entrepreneurial cognition and socially situated approach: a systematic and bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1675-1718, September.
    6. Evi Sachini & Nikolaos Karampekios & Pierpaolo Brutti & Konstantinos Sioumalas-Christodoulou, 2020. "Should I stay or should I go? Using bibliometrics to identify the international mobility of highly educated Greek manpower," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 641-663, October.
    7. Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel & Lin Zhang, 2021. "Tracing the development of mapping knowledge domains," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6201-6224, July.
    8. Moritz A. Drupp & Menusch Khadjavi & Rudi Voss, 2024. "The Truth-Telling of Truth-Seekers: Evidence from Online Experiments with Scientists," CESifo Working Paper Series 10897, CESifo.
    9. Raphaël Maucuer & Alexandre Renaud, 2019. "Business Model Research: A Bibliometric Analysis of Origins and Trends," Post-Print hal-01918188, HAL.
    10. Guido Schultefrankenfeld, 2020. "Appropriate monetary policy and forecast disagreement at the FOMC," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 223-255, January.
    11. Israel R. Orimoloye & Olusola O. Ololade, 2021. "Global trends assessment of environmental health degradation studies from 1990 to 2018," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 3251-3264, March.
    12. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    13. Javdani, Moshen & Chang, Ha-Joon, 2019. "Who Said or What Said? Estimating Ideological Bias in Views Among Economists," MPRA Paper 91958, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Zacharias Maniadis & Fabio Tufano & John A. List, 2017. "To Replicate or Not To Replicate? Exploring Reproducibility in Economics through the Lens of a Model and a Pilot Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(605), pages 209-235, October.
    15. Cathelijn J. F. Waaijer, 2013. "Careers in science: policy issues according to Nature and Science editorials," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(2), pages 485-495, August.
    16. Tomasz Ingram & Monika Wieczorek-Kosmala & Karel Hlaváček, 2023. "Organizational Resilience as a Response to the Energy Crisis: Systematic Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-35, January.
    17. Arnaldo Camuffo & Alfonso Gambardella & Danilo Messinese & Elena Novelli & Emilio Paolucci & Chiara Spina, 2024. "A scientific approach to entrepreneurial decision‐making: Large‐scale replication and extension," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(6), pages 1209-1237, June.
    18. María de la Cruz del Río-Rama & Claudia Patricia Maldonado-Erazo & José Álvarez-García & Amador Durán-Sánchez, 2020. "Cultural and Natural Resources in Tourism Island: Bibliometric Mapping," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-26, January.
    19. Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado & Juan-José Nájera-Sánchez & Eva-María Mora-Valentín, 2018. "A Research Agenda on Open Innovation and Entrepreneurship: A Co-Word Analysis," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-17, July.
    20. Francesco Paolo Appio & Fabrizio Cesaroni & Alberto Minin, 2014. "Visualizing the structure and bridges of the intellectual property management and strategy literature: a document co-citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 623-661, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    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:ags:polgne:359232. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/irsghpl.html .

    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.