Suchergebnisse

Dahl and Lochner (2012) provides some of the first causal evidence of the effects of family income on child achievement using changes in the Earned Income Tax Credit. Unfortunately, a coding error in the creation of total family income affects the first stage estimates and inflates the instrumental variable (IV) estimates. Importantly, it does not affect the reduced-form estimates or alter statistical significance of the IV estimates. This response shows that correcting this error does not alter the core findings or main message of the paper. (JEL H24, H31, I21, I38, J13)

To what degree do economists disagree about key economic questions? We provide evidence by using the responses to a series of questions posed to a distinguished panel of economists put together by the Chicago School of Business. Based on our analysis, we find a broad consensus on these many different economic issues, particularly when the past economic literature on the question is large. Any differences are unrelated to observable characteristics of the Panel members, other than men being slightly more likely to express an opinion. These differences are idiosyncratic, with no support for liberal versus conservative camps.

Using an instrumental variables strategy, we estimate the causal effect of income on children's math and reading achievement. Our identification derives from the large, nonlinear changes in the Earned Income Tax Credit. The largest of these changes increased family income by as much as 20 percent, or approximately $2,100, between 1993 and 1997. Our baseline estimates imply that a $1,000 increase in income raises combined math and reading test scores by 6 percent of a standard deviation in the short run. Test gains are larger for children from disadvantaged families and robust to a variety of alternative specifications. (JEL H24, H31, I21, I38, J13)

The randomized trial is the gold standard in scientific research and is used by several fields to study the effects of media. Although useful for studying the immediate response to media exposure, the experimental approach is not well suited to studying long‐term effects or behavior outside the laboratory. The "natural experiment" approach, a quasi‐experimental method commonly used by economists, exploits settings in which there is naturally occurring variation that "randomly" influences the amount and type of media that individuals are exposed to. We discuss the methodological issues of natural experiments and the ways in which findings based on this approach can complement the findings from laboratory or other experimental settings. The examples we discuss highlight the value of interdisciplinary work in better understanding media's impact on family issues such as fertility, divorce, domestic violence, and child well‐being.