New wine in old bottles: a meta-analysis of Ricardian equivalence.

A meta-analysis is presented of 28 empirical studies of the Ricardian equivalence theorem (RET) conducted over the last two decades. Although there is great disagreement concerning the validity of Ricardian equivalence among both contributors and reviewers, the meta-analysis indicates that the testi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Southern Economic Journal Vol. 64; no. 3; pp. 713 - 728
Autor principal: Stanley, T. D.
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Southern Economic Association January 1998
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=510872144&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ssf
    uiTerm: 510872144
    longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00384038
        SEJ
      jtl: Southern Economic Journal
      issn: 00384038
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: January 1998
      vid: 64
      iid: 3
      pid: 1482
      pub: Southern Economic Association
    artinfo:
      ui:
        510872144
        10.2307/1060788
      ppf: 713
      ppct: 15
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: T
      tig:
        atl: New wine in old bottles: a meta-analysis of Ricardian equivalence.
      aug:
        au: Stanley, T. D.
      su:
        Ricardian equivalence theorem
        Meta-analysis
        Econometrics
      sug:
        subj:
          Ricardian equivalence theorem
          Meta-analysis
          Econometrics
      ab: A meta-analysis is presented of 28 empirical studies of the Ricardian equivalence theorem (RET) conducted over the last two decades. Although there is great disagreement concerning the validity of Ricardian equivalence among both contributors and reviewers, the meta-analysis indicates that the testing record, as a whole, entails a strong empirical rejection of RET. This conclusion is bolstered by the fact that both a study's degrees of freedom and its proper econometric specification increase the likelihood of rejection. A meta-regression analysis yields nine study characteristics that help explain the large study-to-study variation found among reported RET test results.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: N
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N