Methodological Variation in Empirical Corporate Finance
Abstract I document large variation in empirical methodology in corporate finance regressions in top finance journals. Although methodological variation allows for customization of empirical tests to fit specific theories, it can also enable excessive reporting of statistically significant results. For example, given discretion over 10 routine methodological decisions, a researcher could report that over 70% of randomly generated variables are statistically significant determinants of leverage at the 5% level. The methodological decisions that affect statistical significance the most are dependent variable selection, variable transformation, and outlier treatment. I discuss remedies that can mitigate the negative effects of methodological variation.
Presidential Address: Corporate Finance and Reality
John R. Graham · Journal of Finance
Institutional Investors and Corporate Governance: The Incentive to Be Engaged
Jonathan Lewellen, Katharina Lewellen · Journal of Finance
Stock Market Returns and Consumption
Marco Di Maggio, Amir Kermani, Kaveh Majlesi · Journal of Finance
Discontinuous Distribution of Test Statistics Around Significance Thresholds in Empirical Accounting Studies
Xin Chang, Huasheng Gao, Wei Li · Journal of Accounting Research
Do CEOs Matter? Evidence from Hospitalization Events
Morten Bennedsen, Francisco Pérez‐González, Daniel Wolfenzon · Journal of Finance
Taming the Factor Zoo: A Test of New Factors
Guanhao Feng, Stefano Giglio, Dacheng Xiu · Journal of Finance
Is Bitcoin Really Untethered?
John M. Griffin, Amin Shams · Journal of Finance
Predictably Unequal? The Effects of Machine Learning on Credit Markets
Andreas Fuster, Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham, Tarun Ramadorai, Ansgar Walther · Journal of Finance