Bump to another great thread.
Kearney and Levine forthcoming AEJ:Applied The Revenge of the Cookie Monster
-
Applied micro folk often make fun of macro because macro has predict 9 of the last 5 recessions (I'm applied micro so I'm guilty too).
But if add up estimates from the credibility revolution we have explained
1. 200 percent of the increase in obesity
2. 300 percent of racism
3. 500 percent of gender biasAll of these partial eqbm estimates can't be right unless there are big general eqgm effects in the background that largely offset the partial eqbm effects
-
Applied micro folk often make fun of macro because macro has predict 9 of the last 5 recessions (I'm applied micro so I'm guilty too).
But if add up estimates from the credibility revolution we have explained
1. 200 percent of the increase in obesity
2. 300 percent of racism
3. 500 percent of gender bias
All of these partial eqbm estimates can't be right unless there are big general eqgm effects in the background that largely offset the partial eqbm effectsMake Appliedmicro Great Again....
-
Just saw a paper similar to this....
Applied micro folk often make fun of macro because macro has predict 9 of the last 5 recessions (I'm applied micro so I'm guilty too).
But if add up estimates from the credibility revolution we have explained
1. 200 percent of the increase in obesity
2. 300 percent of racism
3. 500 percent of gender bias
All of these partial eqbm estimates can't be right unless there are big general eqgm effects in the background that largely offset the partial eqbm effects -
Just saw a paper similar to this....
Applied micro folk often make fun of macro because macro has predict 9 of the last 5 recessions (I'm applied micro so I'm guilty too).
But if add up estimates from the credibility revolution we have explained
1. 200 percent of the increase in obesity
2. 300 percent of racism
3. 500 percent of gender bias
All of these partial eqbm estimates can't be right unless there are big general eqgm effects in the background that largely offset the partial eqbm effects
They're all like that, and they're a huge % of the profession, so yeah...
-
Or, more likely, these are gross overestimates due to widespread instrument-fishing.
Applied micro folk often make fun of macro because macro has predict 9 of the last 5 recessions (I'm applied micro so I'm guilty too).
But if add up estimates from the credibility revolution we have explained
1. 200 percent of the increase in obesity
2. 300 percent of racism
3. 500 percent of gender bias
All of these partial eqbm estimates can't be right unless there are big general eqgm effects in the background that largely offset the partial eqbm effects -
Just saw a paper similar to this....
Applied micro folk often make fun of macro because macro has predict 9 of the last 5 recessions (I'm applied micro so I'm guilty too).
But if add up estimates from the credibility revolution we have explained
1. 200 percent of the increase in obesity
2. 300 percent of racism
3. 500 percent of gender bias
All of these partial eqbm estimates can't be right unless there are big general eqgm effects in the background that largely offset the partial eqbm effects
They're all like that, and they're a huge % of the profession, so yeah...
Not all, but this one account for like 90% of child deaths with something is no way possible to that.
-
Imagine writing this paper and actually believing that you have uncovered an aspect of the causal fabric between broadcast television and cognitive development.
It must be great to be this blissfully ignorant. It's not embarassing if you don't know how stupid you look.
-
Imagine writing this paper and actually believing that you have uncovered an aspect of the causal fabric between broadcast television and cognitive development.
It must be great to be this blissfully ignorant. It's not embarassing if you don't know how stupid you look.It is pretty crazy that one can think that watching a TV program 60 minutes a week with 10 minutes of it being educational is going to have an impact on cognitive development.
-
"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?Funny how it is hard to tell the difference between real and fake papers in 2019. Maybe Ramusen is on to something....