The Other Transformation in Econometric Practice: Robust Tools for Inference

Stock, James H.

doi:10.1257/jep.24.2.83

This setting lets you change the way you view articles. You can choose to have articles open in a dialog window, a new tab, or directly in the same window.

Open in Dialog
Open in New Tab
Open in same window

Journal of Economic Perspectives: Vol. 24 No. 2 (Spring 2010)

JEP Volume. 24, Issue 2 | left

Previous Article Next Article right

Expand

Quick Tools:

Print Article Summary Email Link to this Article Export Citation
Sign up for Email Alerts Follow us on Twitter

Explore:

JEP - All Issues

The Other Transformation in Econometric Practice: Robust Tools for Inference

Article Citation

Stock, James H. 2010. "The Other Transformation in Econometric Practice: Robust Tools for Inference." Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(2): 83-94.

DOI: 10.1257/jep.24.2.83

Abstract

Angrist and Pischke highlight one aspect of the research that has positively transformed econometric practice and teaching. They emphasize the rise of experiments and quasi-experiments as credible sources of identification in microeconometric studies, which they usefully term "design-based research." But in so doing, they miss an important part of the story: a second research strand aimed at developing tools for inference that are robust to subsidiary modeling assumptions. My first aim in these remarks therefore is to highlight some key developments in this area. I then turn to Angrist and Pischke's call for adopting experiments and quasi-experiments in macroeconometrics; while sympathetic, I suspect the scope for such studies is limited. I conclude with some observations on the current debate about whether experimental methods have gone too far in abandoning economic theory.

Article Full-Text Access

Full-text Article (Complimentary)

Authors

Stock, James H. (Harvard U)

JEL Classifications

B41: Economic Methodology
C01: Econometrics

Comments

View Comments on This Article (0) | Login to post a comment