Dataset Information

Stochastic dominance spanning and augmenting the human development index with institutional quality.

ABSTRACT: The well-known Human Development Index (HDI) goes beyond a single measure of well-being as it is constructed as a composite index of achievements in education, income, and health dimensions. However, it is argued that the above dimensions do not reflect the overall well-being, and new indicators should be included in its construction. This paper uses stochastic dominance spanning to test the inclusion of additional institutional quality (governance) dimensions to the HDI, and we examine whether the augmentation of the original set of welfare dimensions by an additional component leads to distributional welfare gains or losses or neither. We find that differently constructed indicators of the same institutional quality measure produce different distributions of well-being.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10479-022-04656-w.

SUBMITTER: Pinar M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9334449 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Stochastic dominance spanning and augmenting the human development index with institutional quality.

Pinar Mehmet M Stengos Thanasis T Topaloglou Nikolas N

Annals of operations research 20220413 1

The well-known Human Development Index (HDI) goes beyond a single measure of well-being as it is constructed as a composite index of achievements in education, income, and health dimensions. However, it is argued that the above dimensions do not reflect the overall well-being, and new indicators should be included in its construction. This paper uses stochastic dominance spanning to test the inclusion of additional institutional quality (governance) dimensions to the HDI, and we examine whether ...[more]

PMID: 35915603

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundImproving rigor and transparency measures should lead to improvements in reproducibility across the scientific literature; however, the assessment of measures of transparency tends to be very difficult if performed manually.ObjectiveThis study addresses the enhancement of the Rigor and Transparency Index (RTI, version 2.0), which attempts to automatically assess the rigor and transparency of journals, institutions, and countries using manuscripts scored on criteria found in reproducibility guidelines (eg, Materials Design, Analysis, and Reporting checklist criteria).MethodsThe RTI tracks 27 entity types using natural language processing techniques such as Bidirectional Long Short-term Memory Conditional Random Field-based models and regular expressions; this allowed us to assess over 2 million papers accessed through PubMed Central.ResultsBetween 1997 and 2020 (where data were readily available in our data set), rigor and transparency measures showed general improvement (RTI 2.29 to 4.13), suggesting that authors are taking the need for improved reporting seriously. The top-scoring journals in 2020 were the Journal of Neurochemistry (6.23), British Journal of Pharmacology (6.07), and Nature Neuroscience (5.93). We extracted the institution and country of origin from the author affiliations to expand our analysis beyond journals. Among institutions publishing >1000 papers in 2020 (in the PubMed Central open access set), Capital Medical University (4.75), Yonsei University (4.58), and University of Copenhagen (4.53) were the top performers in terms of RTI. In country-level performance, we found that Ethiopia and Norway consistently topped the RTI charts of countries with 100 or more papers per year. In addition, we tested our assumption that the RTI may serve as a reliable proxy for scientific replicability (ie, a high RTI represents papers containing sufficient information for replication efforts). Using work by the Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology, we determined that replication papers (RTI 7.61, SD 0.78) scored significantly higher (P<.001) than the original papers (RTI 3.39, SD 1.12), which according to the project required additional information from authors to begin replication efforts.ConclusionsThese results align with our view that RTI may serve as a reliable proxy for scientific replicability. Unfortunately, RTI measures for journals, institutions, and countries fall short of the replicated paper average. If we consider the RTI of these replication studies as a target for future manuscripts, more work will be needed to ensure that the average manuscript contains sufficient information for replication attempts.

Dataset Information

Stochastic dominance spanning and augmenting the human development index with institutional quality.

Supplementary information

Publications

Stochastic dominance spanning and augmenting the human development index with institutional quality.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets