Working Paper: NBER ID: w27849
Authors: Brian Fabo; Martina Janokov; Elisabeth Kempf; Lubos Pstor
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.\n
Keywords: Quantitative Easing; Central Banks; Economic Policy; Research Bias
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 affiliation (E58) | reported effectiveness of QE (E52) |
| central bank authorship (E58) | magnitude of QE effects (C54) |
| larger effects of QE (E60) | favorable career outcomes for central bank researchers (E58) |
| managerial influence (M54) | research findings (C90) |
| methodological choices (C90) | discrepancies in findings (C90) |
| management involvement (M54) | estimates of QE effects (C54) |