Do you think it is dept chairs that request these or is it admin people in HR that add the letter requirement because they don’t realize the letters don’t matter?

Lots of questions about AI in the editorial process these days. Thank you, Ray, for sharing the reviewer guidance. Bottomline, you can use AI tools, but we are looking for your judgment, not that of AI. We appreciate it if you let us know if/how you used AI.

In medicine they’ve got 20 people on papers, half of which have no idea what the study is about. The people who do usually don’t know what they‘re doing. I’m not sure I ready to believe medicine is closer to finding the true distribution of effects over any other field.

Joe what does the true distribution of effects look like?

My first time as a finalist. Hopefully not the last.

@nihcm.bsky.social @ubuffaloecon.bsky.social
@ubartsandsciences.bsky.social
@ubuffalo.bsky.social

You can’t make a cool acronym with those.

Wasnt the whole point of prediction markets originally that insiders will trade? The concept being that we pay to release hidden info to create better predictions?

I think people do this. They’ll talk about a policy or something that people can’t respond to. But you Can’t respond to a blind critique of, “well that’s endogenous.” IMO, the second is much more common than people trying to claim theyve controlled for everything.

Hard to believe there wouldn’t be better policy options than just, hey let’s make you ignorant.

Seems harsh to give *zero* points for that first answer.

I am not familiar with this code so I could be wrong, but I think you need one more restriction.

I feel like one way to look at it is you can do a one sided test if you are willing to make a bet and sacrifice your power on the other side. But given the incentives, we should stick to two sided tests in this case unless we prespecify the use of a one sided test, so that we have to stick to it.

A ton of negative measurement error or just randomness.

I think you are close. You wanna re-paramaterize so that you have d1=b1-b2, d2=b1-b3, and d3=b2-b3, then you can do what Adam did and test H0: d1‎ = d2=d3=0 vs H1: d1<0, d2<0, d3<0 using that paper he posted.

Yeah I can see that happening! And I also don’t mean it as a critique, seem like you made a reasonable approach. But if you find bhat>0, then arent you implying b1>0 and b2>0 and b3>0, not b1>0 and/or b2>0 and/or b3>0?That would seem to be a higher rejection threshold.

This is a good suggestion. But is the alternative in the test you did the same as the one you wanted to test? Seems like it is a higher threshold, meaning you are less likely to reject/ less powerful.

Alternatively maybe you can express your hypothesis as a conditional moment and use this?
users.ssc.wisc.edu/~xshi28/rese...

I thought about it some more and the distribution of restricted least squares with inequality constraints is not normal, so the test would be more complicsted than an f/Wald test.

This paper might help
www.jstor.org/stable/1912529

One way to do this could be to do restricted least squares to estimate your restricted model.

Can you embed these assumptions into your model to get a restricted version of your full model? If so, then you should be able to do a standard f test.

Their numbers likely reflect their decades of exposure to recent finances since then, at least in part. So you’re overstating what they considered financially successful back then.

Seems like you’re comparing inflation adjusted (at least implicitly) numbers to ones that weren’t. Hard to imagine boomers recall exactly what they would have thought financially successfully meant in 1973 precisely when they were asked about it in 2024.

I Would consider the issue with calling his work at McKinsey as peer reviewed as potentially a problem for a university president, but it would also be a problem for a Dean, too. So why wasnt it an issue before?

Apparently he was hired as the business school dean 10 years ago straight from McKinsey, and he did not have a PhD (or maybe just earned it at the time). So wasnt it totally apparent that the guy is not an academic? If so, is it still fair to critique the guy basically For not being an academic?

One last (sobering) update on the #EconJobMarket before the winter holidays; data as of 2025-12-14.
In terms of # of job listings on Job Openings for Economists (JOE), this is the worst job mkt in recent yrs for PhD Economists. # jobs down 20% from last yr, even 18.9% lower than during COVID (2020).

Interesting experiment! That said, couldn’t some of the response have been fraudsters? And couldn’t there be more fraud that didn’t respond not respond at all? I don’t see why we should expect compilers to be a large portion of the population of fraudsters.

Sorry Mike that is *really far* something they’d consider. Lebron is still putting up 24/8/9.

Besides, that wouldn’t work under the cap. Salaries would be extremely far from being matched.

Enrollment increasing doesn’t mean the FAFSA didn’t ramp down on college going, though. So don’t draw conclusions until we can estimate the counterfactual!