IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jecmet/v26y2019i4p347-360.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The fragility of results and bias in empirical research: an exploratory exposition

Author

Listed:
  • Imad A. Moosa

Abstract

The results of empirical work in economics and finance are typically sensitive, inter alia, to model specification, sample period, variable definitions and estimation methods. If the underlying issue attracts bias of some sort, the reporting of the results tends to be selective, intended to confirm prior beliefs, which may be ideologically-driven, or to make the paper more publishable. In this paper the fragility (variability and sensitivity) of empirical results is demonstrated and the process whereby it enables research selection bias is described. For this purpose, several research areas are considered, including the determinants of economic growth, the effect of gender on risk aversion, the determinants of capital structure, the J-curve effect, the effect of corruption on foreign direct investment, and the Kuznets curve.

Suggested Citation

  • Imad A. Moosa, 2019. "The fragility of results and bias in empirical research: an exploratory exposition," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(4), pages 347-360, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jecmet:v:26:y:2019:i:4:p:347-360
    DOI: 10.1080/1350178X.2018.1556798
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/1350178X.2018.1556798
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/1350178X.2018.1556798?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mariusz Maziarz, 2019. "The unrealistic realist philosophy. The ontology of econometrics revisited," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 13(1), pages 39-64, November.

    More about this item

    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:taf:jecmet:v:26:y:2019:i:4:p:347-360. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJEC20 .

    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.