search

numbats / yowie-paper

Paper describing the cleaning of the wages data
Other
1 stars 1 forks source link

Comments related to the original (Singer-Willet) and the refreshed data #5

Closed Dewi-Amaliah closed 2 years ago

Dewi-Amaliah commented 2 years ago

Here are the reviewers' comments related to the original vs. the refreshed data:

  1. Section 4 talks about the variables in the original data. “One would expect that there is a record of the day the individual first started a job, and this is used to adjust the year of collection.” I’m not sure what this means. Please clarify. (This issue is related to the work experience variable.)
  2. I was surprised to hear a direct ID matching isn’t possible. Perhaps clarify why this is – were the IDs scrubbed from the textbook dataset?
  3. If the goal was to reproduce the textbook data, then why weren’t wages inflation-adjusted?
  4. At the end of page 14, it would be good to explicitly say that if people don’t like your decisions, they can grab the code and adjust the parameters themselves! It’s implied, but should be made explicit.
  5. For Figure 7, why did you choose to show the entire dataset here? It would be easier to make a comparison if the plot was cut off at 1994 on the x-axis. Also, this figure is interesting, but it wasn’t until my second time through that I realized this was the textbook example for replicating. There is a clear difference in analyses (different questions really), but is there anything to justify a similarity or improvement of the analysis?