Score contribution per author:
α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count
This paper draws attention to some possible misunderstandings concerning the place of long‐run outcomes in growth theory. It argues that the traditional emphasis on these outcomes is often misguided. As a result of this emphasis, too much attention is paid to the role of knife‐edge assumptions, and researchers may be led to interpretations of the evidence, or models of the growth process, that are not wholly sensible.