Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 664

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Reflections on the Natural Rate Hypothesis

Open access
Stiglitz, Joseph·1997·Journal of Economic Perspectives

Abstract

Does the deviation of unemployment from some natural rate provide a robust and useful way to predict changes in the inflation rate? Can economists explain why the NAIRU changes over time? Is the NAIRU a useful way to frame policy discussions despite the uncertainty surrounding its precise level? The NAIRU hypothesis passes all three tests. Recent research shows that the NAIRU has fallen dramatically in the last decade. This paper refutes the need for a highly restrictive bias in macroeconomic policy because small deviations from the NAIRU will lead to only small, possibly easily correctable, changes in the inflation rate.

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 · 10.1257/jep.11.1.3

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.

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

Cited by

See all 664

Metadata

Authors
Stiglitz, J.
Venue
Journal of Economic Perspectives
Published
1997-02-01
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
3-10
ISSN
0895-3309 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2127808655
Cited by
664
References
0
FWCI
102.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Reflections on the Natural Rate Hypothesis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1257/jep.11.1.3
The paper
Stiglitz, J. (1997). Reflections on the Natural Rate Hypothesis. Journal of Economic Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.11.1.3

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.