Working Paper: CEPR ID: DP15449
Authors: Brian Fabo; Martina Jancokova; Elisabeth Kempf; Lubo Pastor
Abstract: We compare the findings of central bank researchers and academic economists regarding the macroeconomic effects of quantitative easing (QE). We find that central bank papers find QE to be more effective than academic papers do. Central bank papers report larger effects of QE on output and inflation. They also report QE effects on output that are more significant, both statistically and economically, and they use more positive language in the abstract. Central bank researchers who report larger QE effects on output experience more favorable career outcomes. A survey of central banks reveals substantial involvement of bank management in research production.
Keywords: economic research; central bank; quantitative easing; QE; career concerns
JEL Codes: A11; E52; E58; G28
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| Central bank papers (E58) | larger and more significant effects of QE on output (E19) |
| Central bank papers (E58) | larger and more significant effects of QE on inflation (E31) |
| Larger QE effects (E19) | favorable career outcomes for central bank researchers (E58) |
| One standard deviation increase in estimated effect of QE on output (C54) | career improvement of about half a rank (J62) |
| Central bank papers (E58) | more positive language in abstracts (C90) |
| Use of DSGE models (E13) | reported results (Y10) |
| Central bank affiliation (E58) | reported effects of QE on output and inflation (E52) |