Diagnosing Sample-Selection Bias in Historical Heights: A Reply to Komlos and A’Hearn
回应Komlos和A’Hearn的批评，重申2017年文章的观点：经济史中使用基于选择的样本存在陷阱，特别是关于美国内战前身高谜题的文献，并强调诊断与纠正样本选择偏差的区别。
Our 2017 article in this Journal stresses the pitfalls of using choice-based samples in economic history. A prominent example is the literature addressing the so-called antebellum puzzle. Heights researchers claim that Americans grew shorter in the first half of the nineteenth century, a period of robust economic growth. We argue that this result relies on choice-based samples. Without knowing the process that led to inclusion in the sample, researchers cannot properly estimate conditional mean heights. We proposed a diagnostic that can detect, but not correct for, selection bias. Komlos and A’Hearn’s interpretation of our analysis confuses diagnosis with cure. We dispute their view that selection bias has been appreciated in the heights literature.