Diagnosing Sample-Selection Bias in Historical Heights: A Reply to Komlos and A’Hearn

B-Tier
Journal: Journal of Economic History
Year: 2019
Volume: 79
Issue: 4
Pages: 1154-1175

Score contribution per author:

0.670 = (α=2.01 / 3 authors) × 1.0x B-tier

α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count

Abstract

Our 2017 article in this Journal stresses the pitfalls of using choice-based samples in economic history. A prominent example is the literature addressing the so-called antebellum puzzle. Heights researchers claim that Americans grew shorter in the first half of the nineteenth century, a period of robust economic growth. We argue that this result relies on choice-based samples. Without knowing the process that led to inclusion in the sample, researchers cannot properly estimate conditional mean heights. We proposed a diagnostic that can detect, but not correct for, selection bias. Komlos and A’Hearn’s interpretation of our analysis confuses diagnosis with cure. We dispute their view that selection bias has been appreciated in the heights literature.

Technical Details

RePEc Handle
repec:cup:jechis:v:79:y:2019:i:4:p:1154-1175_8
Journal Field
Economic History
Author Count
3
Added to Database
2026-01-24