Cited by 56Housing Market and EconomicsUrban and Rural Development ChallengesUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies

The benefits and costs of the section 8 existing housing program

Reeder, William J.·1985·Journal of Public Economics

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0047-2727(85)90014-3

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 22 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Reeder, W. J.
Affiliations
Economic Research Service (US)
Corresponding author
Reeder, William J.
Venue
Journal of Public Economics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1985-04
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
349-377
ISSN
0047-2727 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2005489127
Cited by
55
References
22
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Public Economics (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Housing Market and Economics
  • Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Urban and Rural Development Challenges
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Urban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies
Keywords
housing subsidies, cash grants, allocative efficiency, distributional effects, program eligibility, household consumption, poverty

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review