Plan robustness checks for finance and economics papers to assess whether findings hold under different samples, variable definitions, and modeling choices. Get method-specific checklists, test priorities, and a template for presenting results.
Checklist of empirical robustness tests for finance/economics papers
Run score Not tested
See how to installReview the instructions the agent will receive before you install.
Systematic checklist of robustness tests for empirical research. Use this to ensure comprehensive testing before submission.
| Test | Description | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
| Exclude outliers | Winsorize/trim at different levels (0.5%, 2%, 5%) | Always |
| Drop financial firms | Exclude SIC 6000-6999 | If not already excluded |
| Drop regulated industries | Exclude utilities, telecoms | Industry-specific effects |
| Different time periods | Split sample pre/post crisis, early/late | Results may be period-specific |
| Geographic subsamples | By region, state, country | External validity |
| Size subsamples | Small vs. large firms | Heterogeneous effects |
| Balanced panel | Require continuous observations | Survivorship concerns |
| Test | Description | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
| Different fixed effects | Firm, industry×year, state×year | Control for unobservables |
| Additional controls | Add variables referees might suggest | Omitted variable concerns |
| Drop controls | Verify not over-controlling | Mediator concerns |
| Different clustering | Firm, industry, state, two-way | Inference robustness |
| Different standard errors | Bootstrap, Newey-West, Driscoll-Kraay | Serial/cross-sectional correlation |
| Nonlinear specifications | Quadratic terms, splines | Linearity assumption |
| Log vs. level | Transform dependent variable | Skewed distributions |
| Test | Description | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
| Alternative dependent variable | Different proxy for same concept | Measurement concerns |
| Alternative treatment measure | Continuous vs. binary, different threshold | Treatment definition |
| Alternative control measures | Different proxies for size, leverage, etc. | Standard practice |
| Scaled differently | By assets, sales, employees | Scaling choice matters |
| Test | Description | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo/Falsification | ||
| Placebo timing | Fake treatment 1-3 years before actual | DiD parallel trends |
| Placebo outcome | Effect on outcome that shouldn't be affected | Specificity of mechanism |
| Placebo treatment | Random assignment of treatment | Rule out spurious correlation |
| Pre-trends | ||
| Event study plot | Coefficient for each pre/post period | Visual parallel trends |
| Joint F-test | Test pre-period coefficients = 0 | Statistical parallel trends |
| Endogeneity | ||
| Instrumental variables | Find exogenous variation | Selection concerns |
| Heckman selection | Model selection explicitly | Sample selection |
| Propensity score matching | Match treated/control | Observable selection |
| Entropy balancing | Reweight to balance covariates | Covariate imbalance |
| Regression discontinuity | If threshold exists | Sharp identification |
| Test | Description | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
| Wild cluster bootstrap | Small number of clusters | <50 clusters |
| Randomization inference | Permutation-based p-values | Few treated units |
| Conley standard errors | Spatial correlation | Geographic data |
| Multiple hypothesis correction | Bonferroni, FDR | Many outcomes tested |
For difference-in-differences designs:
For instrumental variables:
At minimum, most papers should include:
For robustness tables:
Table X: Robustness Tests
Panel A: Alternative Samples
(1) Baseline
(2) Exclude financial firms
(3) Exclude 2008-2009
(4) Winsorize at 5%
Panel B: Alternative Specifications
(5) Add industry×year FE
(6) Control for firm age
(7) Cluster by industry
Panel C: Alternative Measures
(8) Alternative dependent variable
(9) Continuous treatment measure
No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.
No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.
No comments yet. Be the first to write one.
Turn a broad research idea into clear, testable questions. Compare familiar and less conventional approaches, structure the selected question around its population and methods, and assess variables, feasibility, and potential theoretical contributions.
Helps build a research framework by comparing theories, mapping relationships between variables, and deriving testable hypotheses. Explores less conventional options, examines weaknesses and competing explanations, and produces diagrams with anticipated reviewer objections.
Clarify the philosophical assumptions behind a research project and check whether they fit the proposed methods. Get a reasoned research stance, draft proposal wording, and guidance for explaining how the researcher's background and values shape the study.
Plan and draft academic papers through specialized agent roles covering literature, arguments, citations, and review. Get chapter guidance, revision roadmaps, Traditional Chinese and English abstracts, and documents formatted as LaTeX, DOCX, PDF, or Markdown.
Turn a detailed outline into a philosophy or interdisciplinary manuscript. Draft chapters with repeated quality reviews, check terminology and arguments across sections, and prepare the manuscript, evaluation reports, abstract, and metadata for submission.
Simulate academic peer review through five reviewer roles tailored to the paper's field. Receive separate critiques, an editorial decision, and a prioritized revision roadmap, or check whether a revised manuscript addresses earlier comments.