One Swallow Doesn't Make a Summer: Reply to Kataria
In his comment, Mitesh Kataria (2014) makes three main points about a specific part of our paper (Maniadis, Tufano, and List 2014), namely about Tables 2 and 3. In our paper, we employ these tables in order to illustrate the idea that very inconclusive post-study probabilities that a tested phenomenon is true may result from novel, surprising findings. The main arguments in Kataria (2014) are the following: First, if P(H0) is unknown, as is often the case with economic applications, the post-study probability can lead to even worse inference than the Classical significance test, depending on the quality of the prior. Second, the simulation in Maniadis et al. (2014) ignores previous assessments of P(H0) and instead utilizes a selective empirical setup that favors the use of post-study probabilities. [Third,] contrary to what Maniadis et al. (2014) argue, their results do not allow for drawing general recommendations about which approach is the most appropriate. (Kataria 2014, abs.) We believe that our work might have been misunderstood by Kataria. Moreover, it seems that some of his claims are not supported by relevant empirical evidence.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Andrew J. Oswald, 2007.
"An Examination of the Reliability of Prestigious Scholarly Journals: Evidence and Implications for Decision-Makers,"
London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 74(293), pages 21-31, 02.
- Oswald, Andrew J., 2006. "An Examination of the Reliability of Prestigious Scholarly Journals: Evidence and Implications for Decision-makers," IZA Discussion Papers 2070, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Oswald, Andrew J., 2006. "An Examination of the Reliability of Prestigious Scholarly Journals: Evidence and Implications for Decision-makers," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 744, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
- Zacharias Maniadis & Fabio Tufano & John A. List, 2014. "One Swallow Doesn't Make a Summer: Reply to Kataria," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 11(1), pages 11-16, January.
- John List & Zacharias Maniadis & Fabio Tufano, 2014. "One Swallow Doesn't Make a Summer: Reply to Kataria," Natural Field Experiments 00457, The Field Experiments Website.
- Christoph Engel, 2011. "Dictator games: a meta study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(4), pages 583-610, November.
- Christoph Engel, 2010. "Dictator Games: A Meta Study," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2010_07, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, revised Jan 2011.
- De Long, J Bradford & Lang, Kevin, 1992. "Are All Economic Hypotheses False?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(6), pages 1257-1272, December.
- J. Bradford De Long & Kevin Lang, "undated". "Are All Economic Hypotheses False?," J. Bradford De Long's Working Papers _117, University of California at Berkeley, Economics Department.
- Mitesh Kataria, 2014. "One Swallow Doesn't Make a Summer: A Comment on Zacharias Maniadis, Fabio Tufano, and John List," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 11(1), pages 4-10, January.
- 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. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)