Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 806

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quacks, Lemons, and Licensing: A Theory of Minimum Quality Standards

Leland, Hayne E.·1979·Journal of Political Economy

Abstract

I consider markets with asymmetric information. As suggested by Akerlof, quality deterioration in such markets may take place. I show that this is a general phenomenon. Minimum quality constraints (or "licensing requirements") are examined as a possible solution to the problem. Although not generally a first-best solution, such constraints will increase welfare in a number of cases. The types of markets that are likely to benefit from minimum quality standards are identified. It is then shown that, if quality standards are set by the profession (or industry) itself, it is likely that the standards will be too high.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/260838

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 806

Metadata

Authors
Leland, H. E.
Venue
Journal of Political Economy
Published
1979-12
Volume
87
Issue
6
Pages
1328-1346
ISSN
  • 0022-3808 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-534X
OpenAlex
W2065390951
Cited by
806
References
2
FWCI
10.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quacks, Lemons, and Licensing: A Theory of Minimum Quality Standards. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/260838
The paper
Leland, H. E. (1979). Quacks, Lemons, and Licensing: A Theory of Minimum Quality Standards. Journal of Political Economy. https://doi.org/10.1086/260838

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.