Pass-Through Rates for Alcohol Beverage Excise Taxes: Fixed-Effect versus Random-Effects Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regressions

J. P. Nelson
{"title":"Pass-Through Rates for Alcohol Beverage Excise Taxes: Fixed-Effect versus Random-Effects Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regressions","authors":"J. P. Nelson","doi":"10.13189/aeb.2021.090201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper extends an earlier study to compare two methods for meta-analysis of economic data: fixed-effect models and random-effects models. The models differ fundamentally in the ability to generalize beyond the sample in question. Both models are applied to estimates of pass-through rates for excise taxes on alcohol beverages. Using best-set data from 30 primary studies, weighted means are first reported and compared against a fully-passed tax or rate of unity. Dispersion and heterogeneity statistics are used to assess the performance of each model. Second, means and dispersion statistics are reported by subgroups for country source, beverage (beer, wine-spirits), and published status. Third, tests are conducted for publication selection bias using funnel plots and regression asymmetry tests. Fourth, three procedures are undertaken to reduce selection bias: trim-and-fill; cumulative meta-analysis; and meta-regressions. Three conclusions are reached in the paper. First, average pass-through rates are approximately unity regardless of beverage. Primary researchers should compare estimated rates against this value. Second, a random-effects model is more appropriate for these data, reflecting highly diverse estimates of pass-through rates. Third, greater attention needs to be given to the choice of model for meta-regressions in economics and related disciplines.","PeriodicalId":91438,"journal":{"name":"Advances in economics and business","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in economics and business","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13189/aeb.2021.090201","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper extends an earlier study to compare two methods for meta-analysis of economic data: fixed-effect models and random-effects models. The models differ fundamentally in the ability to generalize beyond the sample in question. Both models are applied to estimates of pass-through rates for excise taxes on alcohol beverages. Using best-set data from 30 primary studies, weighted means are first reported and compared against a fully-passed tax or rate of unity. Dispersion and heterogeneity statistics are used to assess the performance of each model. Second, means and dispersion statistics are reported by subgroups for country source, beverage (beer, wine-spirits), and published status. Third, tests are conducted for publication selection bias using funnel plots and regression asymmetry tests. Fourth, three procedures are undertaken to reduce selection bias: trim-and-fill; cumulative meta-analysis; and meta-regressions. Three conclusions are reached in the paper. First, average pass-through rates are approximately unity regardless of beverage. Primary researchers should compare estimated rates against this value. Second, a random-effects model is more appropriate for these data, reflecting highly diverse estimates of pass-through rates. Third, greater attention needs to be given to the choice of model for meta-regressions in economics and related disciplines.
酒精饮料消费税的传递率:固定效应与随机效应的meta分析和meta回归
本文扩展了早期的研究,比较了两种经济数据元分析方法:固定效应模型和随机效应模型。这些模型在超越所讨论的样本进行概括的能力上有根本的不同。这两个模型都适用于酒精饮料消费税的转嫁率估计。使用来自30项主要研究的最佳数据集,首先报告加权平均值,并将其与完全通过的税收或统一率进行比较。分散性和异质性统计用于评估每个模型的性能。其次,按国家来源、饮料(啤酒、葡萄酒)和出版状态的分组报告平均值和离散度统计数据。第三,使用漏斗图和回归不对称性检验对出版物选择偏差进行检验。第四,采取了三个程序来减少选择偏差:修剪和填充;累积荟萃分析;以及元回归。本文得出三个结论。首先,无论饮料如何,平均通过率都近似为一。初级研究人员应该将估计的发病率与该值进行比较。其次,随机效应模型更适合这些数据,反映了对通过率的高度多样化的估计。第三,需要更多地关注经济学和相关学科中元回归模型的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信