Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34226759›Full record

ArticleJournal of regional science2021

Learning from deregulation: The asymmetric impact of lockdown and reopening on risky behavior during COVID-19.

Edward L Glaeser, Ginger Z Jin, Benjamin T Leyden, Michael Luca

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of regional science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Policy evaluation during a pandemic.Journal of econometrics · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on U.S. entrepreneurship.Letters in spatial and resource sciences · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Transmission in the United States Before Versus After Relaxation of Statewide Social Distancing Measures.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Edward L GlaeserDepartment of Economics Harvard University Cambridge Massachusetts USA.
Ginger Z JinNBER Cambridge Massachusetts USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7912-3780
Benjamin T LeydenDyson School of Applied Economics and Management Cornell University Ithaca New York USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7363-2493
Michael LucaNBER Cambridge Massachusetts USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0747-7544

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, states issued and then rescinded stay-at-home orders that restricted mobility. We develop a model of learning by deregulation, which predicts that lifting stay-at-home orders can signal that going out has become safer. Using restaurant activity data, we find that the implementation of stay-at-home orders initially had a limited impact, but that activity rose quickly after states' reopenings. The results suggest that consumers inferred from reopening that it was safer to eat out. The rational, but mistaken inference that occurs in our model may explain why a sharp rise of COVID-19 cases followed reopening in some states.

Indexed as

coronavirusCOVID‐19mobilitypublic health measures

Identifiers

PMID34226759
PMCPMC8242873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.