This comment reanalyzes data from Oprea (2014) and draws different conclusions. What should AER do? papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
1️⃣ https://poll.blue/p/PhcYuC/1
2️⃣ https://poll.blue/p/PhcYuC/2
3️⃣ https://poll.blue/p/PhcYuC/3
4️⃣ https://poll.blue/p/PhcYuC/4
https://poll.blue/p/PhcYuC/0
1️⃣ https://poll.blue/p/PhcYuC/1
2️⃣ https://poll.blue/p/PhcYuC/2
3️⃣ https://poll.blue/p/PhcYuC/3
4️⃣ https://poll.blue/p/PhcYuC/4
https://poll.blue/p/PhcYuC/0
Comments
(https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5127515)
link to original paper (https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/aer.20221227)
ungated version (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/9fk8ltew86ok06fs14ra6/simplicity.pdf?rlkey=8wj3dbs1na6ll4rz6wjtokl3t&e=2&st=rz8cec3c&dl=0)
Bsky enthusiast, public good provider, and talented event planner @sweiwang.bsky.social came to the rescue! With all helpful URLs 👏
Banki et al comment: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5127515
- the comment should be sent to review, and then published pending the results of the review;
- Oprea should be given a right to reply, subject to the same procedure;
- retraction should be on the cards as a potential result of the process; Oprea could also wish to retract.