IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Measurement Without Theory: A Response to Bailey and Collins

  • Jeremy Greenwood

    (University of Pennsylvania)

  • Ananth Seshadri

    (University of Wisconsin)

  • Guillaume Vandenbroucke

    ()

    (University of Iowa)

Bailey and Collins (forth.) argue that Greenwood, Seshadri and Vandenbroucke (2005)'s hypothesis that the baby boom was partly due to a burst of productivity in the household sector is not supported by evidence. This conclusion is based upon regression results showing that appliance ownership is negatively correlated with fertility. They also argue that the Amish, who limit the use of modern technology, had a baby boom. First, it is demonstrated that a negative correlation between appliance ownership and fertility can arise naturally in Greenwood et al.'s model. Second, evidence is presented casting doubt upon the presumed technological phobia of the Amish.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://rcer.econ.rochester.edu/RCERPAPERS/rcer_561.pdf
File Function: full text
Download Restriction: None

Paper provided by University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER) in its series RCER Working Papers with number 561.

as
in new window

Length: 10 pages
Date of creation: Feb 2011
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:roc:rocher:561
Contact details of provider: Postal: University of Rochester, Center for Economic Research, Department of Economics, Harkness 231 Rochester, New York 14627 U.S.A.

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.:

as in new window
  1. Jeremy Greenwood & Ananth Seshadri & Guillaume Vandenbroucke, 2005. "The Baby Boom and Baby Bust," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 183-207, March.
  2. Stefania Albanesi & Claudia Olivetti, 2010. "Maternal Health and the Baby Boom," NBER Working Papers 16146, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Urban J. Jermann & Marianne Baxter, 1999. "Household Production and the Excess Sensitivity of Consumption to Current Income," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(4), pages 902-920, September.
  4. Larry E. Jones & Michele Tertilt, 2006. "An Economic History of Fertility in the U.S.: 1826-1960," NBER Working Papers 12796, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Doepke, Matthias & Hazan, Moshe & Maoz, Yishay D, 2008. "The Baby Boom and World War II: A Macroeconomic Analysis," CEPR Discussion Papers 6628, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  6. Alice Schoonbroodt & Larry E. Jones, 2010. "Baby Busts and Baby Booms: The Fertility Response to Shocks in Dynastic Models," 2010 Meeting Papers 144, Society for Economic Dynamics.
  7. Jones, Larry & Schoonbroodt, Alice, 2007. "Baby busts and baby booms: the response of fertility to shocks in dynastic models," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 0706, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:roc:rocher:561. 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: (Richard DiSalvo)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.