Impacts of Performance-Enhancing Drug Suspensions on the Demand for Major League Baseball
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2005, Major League Baseball (MLB) introduced a new policy regarding the use of performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) wherein the league would not only suspend but also publicly name any player who tested positive for banned PEDs. Using the estimated television audience size of MLB games from 2006 to 2012, these PED suspension announcements provide a unique natural experiment to test how consumers react to news of PED use. This study finds that PED announcements have two major impacts on the demand for baseball. First, there is on average an immediate 9.3% reduction in the television audience of the PED player’s team. Second, the magnitude of the effect gradually decreases over time yet remains negative and significant for a period of 37 days or approximately 33 game-broadcasts. This is the first study to link PED use to an adverse reaction by consumers in a systematic way using television audience while controlling for the change in team quality caused by removing the suspended player from the team.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it