ScienceGuardians serves the community for free
Secure Environment: Verified contributors only, ensuring meaningful and responsible discussions. Members can stay anonymous while verified, ensuring legitimacy and accountability.
Combatting Misconduct: A fortress against anonymous intimidation and coordinated campaigns, fostering evidence-based dialogue and protecting the academic community.
Resources and Training: Access classified content, participate in enlightening debates, and stay at the forefront of ethical practices.
Hack-Proof Platform: Your privacy is paramount. The identity information of users choosing to remain anonymous is securely stored offline.
Our Commitment:
Integrity and Accountability: Every account verified for credible and responsible engagement.
Inclusivity and Fairness: A platform where all voices in the scientific community are respected.
Support and Collaboration: Helping resolve issues delicately and constructively.
Participant
The paper has serious methodological flaws, including an inadequate justification for ARDL selection, failure to account for structural breaks in stationarity tests, and insufficient robustness in addressing endogeneity and cross-country heterogeneity. Additionally, data reliability is questionable due to inconsistent source citations and a lack of transparency in dataset availability. I invite you to engage in addressing these issues to ensure the study’s credibility and accuracy.