Score contribution per author:
α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count
Economists analyzing a well-conducted randomized controlled trial or natural experiment and finding a statistically significant effect conclude that the null of no effect is unlikely to be true. But how frequently is this conclusion warranted? The answer depends on the proportion of tested nulls that are true and the test's power. I model the distribution of t-statistics in leading economics journals. Using my preferred model, 65% of narrowly rejected null hypotheses and 41% of all rejected null hypotheses with |t|<10 are likely to be false rejections. For the null to have only a .05 probability of being true requires a t of 5.48.