We compare the findings of central bank researchers and academic economists regarding the macroeconomic effects of quantitative easing (QE). We find that central bank papers find QE to be more effective than academic papers do. Central bank papers report larger effects of QE on output and inflation. They also report QE effects on output that are more significant, both statistically and economically, and they use more positive language in the abstract. Central bank researchers who report larger QE effects on output experience more favorable career outcomes. A survey of central banks reveals substantial involvement of bank management in research production.

我们比较了央行研究人员和学术经济学家关于量化宽松 (QE) 宏观经济影响的发现。我们发现央行论文发现量化宽松比学术论文更有效。央行文件报告了量化宽松对产出和通胀的更大影响。他们还报告了量化宽松对产出的影响在统计上和经济上都更显着，并且他们在摘要中使用了更积极的语言。报告量化宽松对产出影响更大的央行研究人员会体验到更有利的职业成果。对中央银行的调查显示银行管理层大量参与研究生产。