Score contribution per author:
α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count
A meta‐analysis of thirty‐four restriction tests from nine studies of the natural rate of unemployment hypothesis (NRU) finds the statistical trace of a false empirical hypothesis. A theme of bias and misspecification among those studies that tend to be more supportive of NRU emerges. When combined with a separate meta‐analysis of NRU's falsifying hypothesis, unemployment ‘hysteresis’ (Stanley 2004a), the natural rate hypothesis may be regarded as empirically ‘falsified’ (Popper 1959). Monte Carlo simulations validate the meta‐regression methods used here to integrate different restriction tests and to identify their limitations.