What do we know about the second moment of financial markets?
Klaus Grobys · 2021 · International Review of Financial Analysis
WASTE classifies this as Negative / Null Result Report · AI classification, approximate
The study found no significant effect — useful as a negative control or null benchmark for your own design.
Abstract
Recent research shows that the vast majority of scientific studies published in leading finance journals fails scientific replication (Hou, Xue, and Zhang, 2020; Harvey, Liu, and Zhu; 2016). This study argues that p-hacking, publication pressure and the selection bias from leading finance journals are perhaps not the underlying root cause for this issue. This study shows that standard methodologies often used in finance research are inevitably sample-specific due to the very nature of financial markets. While the consensus of earlier research postulates a rejection of the time-honored Levy hyp
Abstract by Klaus Grobys, International Review of Financial Analysis (2021) — licensed CC BY 4.0.
About to run something similar?
Run an AI Precheck on your own design to catch failure modes like this one before you spend the time. Your first desk check is free.
Related failures
The Oregon Experiment — Effects of Medicaid on Clinical Outcomes
Negative / Null Result ReportMicrocredit in Theory and Practice: Using Randomized Credit Scoring for Impact Evaluation
Negative / Null Result ReportThe Cost of Carbon: Capital Market Effects of the Proposed Emission Trading Scheme (ETS)
Negative / Null Result ReportPushing on a string: US monetary policy is less powerful in recessions ∗
Negative / Null Result ReportThe Evidence on Globalisation
Negative / Null Result ReportStatistical tests for power-law cross-correlated processes
WASTE indexes this work — it does not host or republish it. Failure-type classification is automated and approximate.
Metadata source: OpenAlex · DOI 10.1016/j.irfa.2021.101891