The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 58 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How reliable is pooled analysis in political economy? The globalization‐welfare state nexus revisited
Abstract
This article analyzes various pitfalls that arise in the application of panel data methods in comparative political economy. Empirically, we refer to the debate on the globalization‐welfare state nexus by re‐assessing a study by Garrett and Mitchell (‘Globalization, Government Spending and Taxation in the OECD’, European Journal of Political Research 39(1) (2001): 145–177). We discuss the properties of specifications with time invariate political variables, dynamic models with nonstationary data, and autocorrelated residuals. We demonstrate that the findings of previous empirical studies are often driven by mis‐specifications. Presenting a statistically well‐behaved model, we find evidence that government spending is primarily driven by the state of the domestic economy. Neither partisan effects nor the international economic environment have affected public expenditure considerably.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
An Introduction to the Bootstrap
Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1994) · doi:10.1201/9780429246593 · Cited by 40,500
A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity
White, H. (1980) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1912934 · Cited by 25,861
An Introduction to the Bootstrap
Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1993) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-4541-9 · Cited by 21,230
Specification Tests in Econometrics
Hausman, J. A. (1978) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1913827 · Cited by 18,820
Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels
Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H., & Shin, Y. (2003) · Journal of Econometrics · doi:10.1016/s0304-4076(03)00092-7 · Cited by 15,435
Econometric Analysis of Panel Data
Baltagi, B. H. (2021) · Springer Texts in Business and Economics · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-53953-5 · Cited by 15,104
Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects
Nickell, S. (1981) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1911408 · Cited by 8,735
An Efficient Method of Estimating Seemingly Unrelated Regressions and Tests for Aggregation Bias
Zellner, A. (1962) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1962.10480664 · Cited by 8,401
Hsiao, C. (2014) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139839327 · Cited by 7,869
Hsiao, C. (2022) · doi:10.1017/9781009057745 · Cited by 7,869
Cited by
Do natural resources fuel authoritarianism? A reappraisal of the resource curse
HABER, S., & MENALDO, V. (2011) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055410000584 · Cited by 1,128
Throwing Out the Baby with the Bath Water: A Comment on Green, Kim, and Yoon
Beck, N., & Katz, J. N. (2001) · International Organization · doi:10.1162/00208180151140658 · Cited by 358
Good Times, Bad Times: Postwar Labor’s Share of National Income in Capitalist Democracies
Kristal, T. (2010) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/0003122410382640 · Cited by 228
Metadata
- Authors
- Kittel, B., & Winner, H.
- Venue
- European Journal of Political Research
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2005-03
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 269-293
- ISSN
- 0304-4130 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-6765
- OpenAlex
- W2038653692
- Cited by
- 288
- References
- 58
- FWCI
- 166.21
- 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: How reliable is pooled analysis in political economy? The globalization‐welfare state nexus revisited. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2005.00228.x
- The paper
- Kittel, B., & Winner, H. (2005). How reliable is pooled analysis in political economy? The globalization‐welfare state nexus revisited. European Journal of Political Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2005.00228.x
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.