When a Bunch of Economists Look at the Same Data, Do They All See It the Same Way?, Kellogg Insight
A new study put this exact proposition to the test. One hundred sixty-four teams of researchers analyzed the same financial-market dataset separately and wrote up their conclusions in 164 short papers. Teams were then given several rounds of feedback, mimicking the kind of informal peer-review process that economists engage in before they submit to an academic journal. All the researchers involved wanted to know how much variation would exist among their different papers. It turns out, a lot. Data can be messy, notoriously so. And so scientists and researchers have developed reams of strategies for cleaning and analyzing and ultimately harnessing data to draw conclusions. But this unusual study—an analysis of 164 separate analyses—suggests that the decisions that go into choosing how to clean the datasets, analyze them, and come to a conclusion can in fact add just as much noise as the data themselves.
Korajczyk, Robert. 2022. When a Bunch of Economists Look at the Same Data, Do They All See It the Same Way?. Kellogg Insight.LINK