The Work Incentives of AFDC Tax Rates: Reconciling Different Estimates

Moffitt, Robert A.; Rangarajan, Anuradha

doi:10.2307/145721

Cited by 12 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We distinguished between articles in which such an explicit replication played a primary versus a limited role in an article. An example of a primary replication was Moffitt and Rangarajan (1991), which was published in the JHR . It replicated (and extended) the work of two previous studies with conflicting results seeking to understand the effect of tax rates on welfare recipients’ labor force participation.…”

Section: A Focused Comparison Of Empirical Articles In Developmental ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Replication and robustness in developmental research.

Duncan¹,

Engel²,

Claessens³

et al. 2014

Developmental Psychology

189

166

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Replications and robustness checks are key elements of the scientific method and a staple in many disciplines. However, leading journals in developmental psychology rarely include explicit replications of prior research conducted by different investigators, and few require authors to establish in their articles or online appendices that their key results are robust across estimation methods, data sets, and demographic subgroups. This article makes the case for prioritizing both explicit replications and, especially, within-study robustness checks in developmental psychology. It provides evidence on variation in effect sizes in developmental studies and documents strikingly different replication and robustness-checking practices in a sample of journals in developmental psychology and a sister behavioral science-applied economics. Our goal is not to show that any one behavioral science has a monopoly on best practices, but rather to show how journals from a related discipline address vital concerns of replication and generalizability shared by all social and behavioral sciences. We provide recommendations for promoting graduate training in replication and robustness-checking methods and for editorial policies that encourage these practices. Although some of our recommendations may shift the form and substance of developmental research articles, we argue that they would generate considerable scientific benefits for the field. (Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968). Just before the school year began, each of the school's 18 teachers was given the names of about five students who, based on a test administered several months before, were alleged to be "academic spurters"-children with exceptional academic promise. In fact these children had been chosen at random from the much larger set of tested students. An IQ test administered at the end of the academic year showed that, among other results, first and second graders in the "spurter" group had larger intellectual gains than did their peers. Teachers described these spurters as having a better chance of being successful in later life and as being happier, more curious, and more interesting than were other children. These results, published in the 1968 book Pygmalion in the Classroom, were widely discussed and bitterly disputed and inspired changes in classroom practice. KeywordsReplication studies quickly appeared, some of which attempted to exactly reproduce the original Pygmalion study conditions, while others explored the robustness of the original results to variations in the context in which the original experiment was conducted. Some of these studies replicated the original Pygmalion effects, while others did not. In 1984, the 18 high-quality published studies on this topic were subjected to a meta-analysis (Raudenbush, 1984). The results showed a clear pattern in which studies that misled teachers before they had much contact with students produced much larger effects (d ϭ ϩ0.23), on average, than cognitive dissonance-invoking studies that tried to mislead teachers aft...

show abstract

Section: A Focused Comparison Of Empirical Articles In Developmental ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Replication and robustness in developmental research.

Duncan¹,

Engel²,

Claessens³

et al. 2014

Developmental Psychology

189

166

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The article was published because of its broader point about the importance of replication and the appalling results it found in trying to validate research published in a major journal, the Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking. The Journal of Human Resources also has a policy inviting replication, although the last published replication experiment appears to date back to 1991 (Moffitt and Rangarajan 1991), reporting a failed replication.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Call for Replication Studies

Alm¹

2010

Public Finance Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In general, high effective marginal tax rates are thought to decrease the incentives to perform an activity while low or negative effective marginal tax rates provide an incentive to perform an activity (CBO, 2005). This can be seen in early work on the effects of welfare, where steep benefi t reductions when a person started earning money typically were found to reduce a person's incentive to work (Moffi tt and Rangarajan, 1991), while the negative marginal tax rates associated with the EITC encouraged people to start working (Meyer and Rosenbaum, 2001;Eissa and Liebman, 1996). If individuals perceive the cost of additional work to be high relative to the potential rewards, they will choose not to increase work, or may underreport their earnings or supplement them through the informal economy.…”

Section: A Why Eff Ective Marginal Tax Rates Mattermentioning

confidence: 99%