Publication Bias in Minimum-Wage Research? Card and Krueger Redux
Card and Krueger’s (1995) meta-analysis of the employment effects of minimum wages challenged existing theory. Unfortunately, their meta-analysis confused publication bias with the absence of a genuine empirical effect. Recently developed meta-analysis methods corroborate that Card and Krueger’s findings were nevertheless correct. The minimum wage effects literature is contaminated by publication bias. Once this publication bias is corrected, no time-series evidence of a negative association between minimum wages and employment remains.
|Date of creation:||15 Oct 2006|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood 3125|
Phone: 61 3 9244 3815
Fax: +61 3 5227 2655
Web page: http://www.deakin.edu.au/buslaw/aef/index.php
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dkn:econwp:eco_2006_16. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dr Xueli Tang)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.