. This review considers several meta-regression and graphical methods that can differentiate genuine empirical effect from publication bias. Publication selection exists when editors, reviewers, or researchers have a preference for statistically significant results. Because all areas of empirical research are susceptible to publication selection, any average or tally of significant/insignificant studies is likely to be biased and potentially misleading. Meta-regression analysis can see through the murk of random sampling error and selected misspecification bias to identify the underlying statistical structures that characterize genuine empirical effect. Meta-significance testing and precision-effect testing (PET) are offered as a means to identify empirical effect beyond publication bias and are applied to four areas of empirical economics research – minimum wage effects, union-productivity effects, price  elasticities, and tests of the natural rate hypothesis.

Beyond Publication Bias

Despite a sizeable theoretical and empirical literature, no firm conclusions have been drawn regarding the impact of political democracy on economic growth. This article challenges the consensus of an inconclusive relationship through a quantitative assessment of the democracy-growth literature. It applies meta-regression analysis to the population of 483 estimates derived from 84 studies on democracy and growth. Using traditional meta-analysis estimators, the bootstrap, and Fixed and Random Effects meta-regression models, it derives several robust conclusions. Taking all the available published evidence together, it concludes that democracy does not have a direct impact on economic growth. However, democracy has robust, significant, and positive indirect effects through higher human capital, lower inflation, lower political instability, and higher levels of economic freedom. Democracies may also be associated with larger governments and less free international trade. There also appear to be country- and region-specific democracy-growth effects. Overall, democracy's net effect on the economy does not seem to be detrimental.

/pdf/democracy-and-economic-growth-a-meta-analysis-4hmukrfvpg.pdf

Democracy and Economic Growth: A Meta‐Analysis

Card and Krueger's meta-analysis of the employment effects of minimum wages challenged existing theory. Unfortunately, their meta-analysis confused publication selection with the absence of a genuine empirical effect. We apply recently developed meta-analysis methods to 64 US minimum-wage studies and corroborate that Card and Krueger's findings were nevertheless correct. The minimum-wage effects literature is contaminated by publication selection bias, which we estimate to be slightly larger than the average reported minimum-wage effect. Once this publication selection is corrected, little or no evidence of a negative association between minimum wages and employment remains.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/bjir_723.pdf?abstractid=1403498&mirid=3

Publication Selection Bias in Minimum‐Wage Research?: A Meta‐Regression Analysis

The relationship between corporate environmental performance and financial performance has received a high degree of attention in research literature and the results are still contradictory. Most o...

Does Environmental Management Improve Financial Performance? A Meta-Analytical Review

This study investigates the small‐sample performance of meta‐regression methods for detecting and estimating genuine empirical effects in research literatures tainted by publication selection. Publication selection exists when editors, reviewers or researchers have a preference for statistically significant results. Meta‐regression methods are found to be robust against publication selection. Even if a literature is dominated by large and unknown misspecification biases, precision‐effect testing and joint precision‐effect and meta‐significance testing can provide viable strategies for detecting genuine empirical effects. Publication biases are greatly reduced by combining two biased estimates, the estimated meta‐regression coefficient on precision (1/Se) and the unadjusted‐average effect.

Meta‐Regression Methods for Detecting and Estimating Empirical Effects in the Presence of Publication Selection*

The impact of unions on productivity is explored using meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis. It is shown that most of the variation in published results is due to specification differences between studies. After controlling for differences between studies, a negative association between unions and productivity is established for the United Kingdom, whereas a positive association is established for the United States in general and for U.S. manufacturing.

What Do Unions Do to Productivity? A Meta‐Analysis

Publication bias arises when statistically non-significant results are suppressed or when only results satisfying prior expectations are published. Like most fields, research in industrial relations is vulnerable to publication bias. In this paper qualitative and quantitative techniques are used in order to detect publication bias in the union-productivity effects literature. We find no evidence of publication bias in this literature, although there does appear to be autoregression in the published results.

Christos Doucouliagos

Papers

What Do Unions Do to Productivity? A Meta‐Analysis

Publication bias in industrial relations research