This should get 1000 goods.
Kearney and Levine forthcoming AEJ:Applied The Revenge of the Cookie Monster
-
Weak paper. Its a silly follow-up to well done original work:
Well-conducted randomized control trials at the time Sesame Street was initially introduced provided evidence that watching the show generated an immediate and sizable increase in test scores. Building on this existing body of early, targeted evidence, our large-scale analysis finds positive impacts on the educational performance of the generation of children who experienced their preschool years when Sesame Street was introduced in areas with greater broadcast coverage." -
I cannot believe I fell for it even after reading the following:
“We also reveal a 22 percent increase in county level cookie sales during the week after an episode when the Cookie Monster was in at least two scenes and that cookies purchased increased monotonically with the number of minutes the Cookie Monster was in the episode.”
-
I cannot believe I fell for it even after reading the following:
“We also reveal a 22 percent increase in county level cookie sales during the week after an episode when the Cookie Monster was in at least two scenes and that cookies purchased increased monotonically with the number of minutes the Cookie Monster was in the episode.”The sad thing is that it is believable given our priors of what garbage goes into that AEJ
-
"Our results suggest that Sesame Street exposure accounts for approximately 32 percent of the increase in youth obesity between the 1960s and 1980s."
Are you f**king kidding me? How could any editor/referee read that and not immediately think the whole paper is bulls**t?probably the referee did not read the paper (or clicked the link)