brassinosteroids ͉ cell fate specification ͉ positional cues ͉ root epidermis

We develop an estimator for publication bias and apply it to 156 hedge portfolios based on published cross-sectional return predictors. Publication bias adjusted returns are only 12% smaller than in-sample returns. The small bias comes from the dispersion of returns across predictors, which is too large to be accounted for by data-mined noise. Among predictors that can survive journal review, a low t-stat hurdle of 1.8 controls for multiple testing using statistics recommended by Harvey, Liu, and Zhu (2015). The estimated bias is too small to account for the deterioration in returns after publication, suggesting an important role for mispricing. * We thank Rebecca Wasyk for excellent scientific programing and Chris Hollrah for excellent research assistance. This paper originated from a conversation with Frank Schorfheide. We also thank

No abstract

No abstract