Reference no: EM133653139
Assignment
For your paper analysis, I ask that you read "Are Government Spending Multipliers Greater during Periods of Slack? Evidence from Twentieth-Century Historical Data" by OwYang, Ramey, and Zubairy (2013). Please summarize this paper and be ready to discuss it. I have provided a template that I would like you to use. Please update the template per the instructions below.
For this paper, we are focusing on how to write and structure a paper in economics. This is a short form paper, which should make it easier to analyze how the structure and composition of the paper highlight the findings. While you read and summarize, and I would like you to focus on the following questions as you summarize the paper:
A. What purpose does each section of the paper serve?
B. What techniques are used to convey the information succinctly?
C. How does this paper differ from those we have read previously?
D. What data and methods are used? BE SPECIFIC.
E. What is an impulse response function? Look it up if you do not know.
F. Overall, what is your assessment of the paper?
Note: your goal is not to directly address these questions. Meaning, I don't want you to literally write "What is the research question? Well..." in your analysis. Instead, after reading your analysis, I should feel like these questions have been answered.
For this paper, I want you to include the following sections:
Section I: Summary
Summarize the paper, including the main findings. This will focus on questions A-C above.
Section II: Methods and Data
Summarize the data and methods used in the paper. This will focus on questions B, C, and D above.
Section III: Composition
Briefly summarize how the structure of the paper (the way it is written, laid out, organized, etc.) contributes to its purpose. Be as specific as possible. This will focus on question A above.
Section IV: Analysis
This is your analysis. This will focus on question F above. Here, I really want you to be thinking about your assessment of how the question is answered, not necessarily whether you like the paper. Is the data relevant? Would you prefer something else to be used? Are the methods convincing? How could you adapt them, or how could you improve them? Etc.