Score contribution per author:
α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count
This paper compares two approaches to the analysis of economic data: the exclusively econometric approach recommended by Hendry and Ericsson and the more eclectic approach that we employed in our books MONETARY HISTORY and MONETARY TRENDS. It concludes that the article by Hendry and Ericsson is mislabeled. Their article is not in any relevant sense an evaluation of our "empirical model of U.K. money demand." Rather, it uses one equation from our book as a peg on which to hang an exposition of sophisticated econometric techniques. Insofar as their empirical findings do bear on ours, they simply confirm some of our principal results and contradict none. Copyright 1991 by American Economic Association.