I'm trying to disprove the study in this article
Can someone with more experience than I in these types of studies point me to where it is wrong?
I'm looking for informed specifics having to do with methodology, results, or data interpretation. Not looking for confirmation bias or dunning kruger please
Why do you have to disprove a "may have caused" from an economist writing for Forbes Magazine? All of these facts, are enough for me to completely discount it. The investors are looking for reasons to fear "Outbreaks", which mean certain stocks will be a buy. No one in this economist's mind really cares if it true or not. Selling and buying occurs when someones "theory" of a stocks potential to rise or fall is believed by enough traders. This is the noise all stock holders learn to ignore. It is like CNN except it can cost you real money!