Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/303193 
Year of Publication: 
2024
Series/Report no.: 
I4R Discussion Paper Series No. 161
Publisher: 
Institute for Replication (I4R), s.l.
Abstract: 
This report evaluates the computational reproducibility and analytical robustness of Exley and Kessler's (2024) investigation into "motivated errors," which suggests that individuals may rationalize selfish behavior by attributing their errors to confusion. Using the original data and code, we could regenerate all results reported in the manuscript and online appendices with full precision. However, our re-analysis identified significant limitations, including insufficiently annotated code, ambiguous variable naming, and the absence of essential participant-level data, which obstruct comprehensive robustness checks. These challenges underscore the importance of best practices in data and code sharing to enhance the transparency and credibility of economic research. Our reflection not only contributes to discussions on empirical rigor but also advocates for improved standards in sharing scholarly resources.
Subjects: 
reproducibility
robustness
credibility
data/code sharing
JEL: 
C18
C81
C91
D91
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
886.19 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.