Response to ‘High Noon for Microfinance Impact Evaluations’
回应Duvendack和Palmer-Jones未能复制作者先前研究结果的批评，指出两篇论文在样本和变量测量上的关键差异，因此他们的工作不应被视为对原研究的复制或批评。
Abstract Duvendack and Palmer-Jones are critical of analysis and conclusions in Chemin (2008) because they are unable to replicate my results. This response identifies key differences between the two papers, especially regarding the sample and measurement of variables, which imply that Duvendack and Paler-Jones should not be considered as either a replication or a criticism of my work.