Research paper

Okay, let’s start with the introduction, data, analysis, conclusions, and limitations. I assigned you 0 points for each of these sections because you neglected to cover the requisite content or completely omitted the entire section.

Introduction

I loved your first sentence! It is short and to the point, describes what you intend to do, and pulls the reader quickly into the paper. After reading the remainder of this section, however, I came away confused about the focus of your research and completely unclear about your approach.

Data

I really don’t understand this section at all. I do not know if you’re using time series or cross-sectional data. On p. 11, you indicate that you’re using data from June 2019, April 2020, May 2020, and June 2020, which suggests a time series approach (albeit with only 4 observations, which is way too small a sample). However, your regression printout on p. 16 shows that you have 58 observations, which suggests a cross-sectional analysis. I don’t know how you got 58 observations – even with all of the states, you would have only 50 observations (not 57, which I assume was a typo). You mention on p. 11 that you’re using monthly data on unemployment and civilian labor force, but that leaves me confused about your model (which I discuss below).

I can’t really talk about data without also talking about your model. On p. 10, you write, “ Two dependent variables of unemployment level have been observed to study the impact of Coronavirus on them.” I have no idea what that means. For one thing, the dependent variable is on the left-hand-side of the regression equation and each regression equation has only one dependent variable. Immediately below that, you say that the “dependent variable = unemployment level and labor force,” again leaving me wondering which is the dependent variable. Then you write that “independent variable = coronavirus,” but you never talk about this variable. At the top of p. 11, your statement that “covid19 = Coronavirus prevailing into the economy” tells me nothing about how the variable is defined or the source from which it is obtained. I also don’t know why you would have two models, but that’s clearly indicated at the bottom of p. 10.

Analysis

Based on the printout on p. 16, your estimated regression equation is:

Unemployment rate = 32,589.9513 + 3.4049 43617

I am assuming that the independent variable in this model is coronavirus, but am totally mystified why you would choose to label it “43617.” In discussing statistical significance (at the top of p. 12), you confuse the intercept term and the independent variable – the latter is significant, but the former is not. But the overall result doesn’t make any sense: it suggests that the unemployment rate is 32,590% if coronavirus is zero! In the second paragraph on p. 12, you refer to a second analysis, which is not included in the paper. Also, when discussing the overall goodness-of-fit, your interpretation of the results confuses the correlation coefficient and the coefficient of determination.

Conclusion

Your conclusions do not reference your findings. Not having considered other factors that might influence the overall level of unemployment in the country, i.e., in the absence of any control variables, it is not clear how you can attribute observed changes in the unemployment rate to the health crisis. While we know intuitively that Covid has been responsible for the dramatic spike in unemployment, it is another thing to make that assertion without any data or empirical analysis to back it up. This is why we include multiple independent variables in the regression model.

The biggest question in my mind, however, revolves around your model. I still don’t know what you did and how you were able to evaluate the impact of the health crisis on state unemployment rates.

Finally, it is not clear to me how your policy recommendations tie back to your analysis. In fact, one of your recommendations (“To get over this circumstance, people ought to learn various abilities with the goal that they can make their value in the employment market.”) comes directly from your literature review.

Limitations

In this section, you indicate that “many states got missed … because of non-availability of data.” This is the first time you mention this problem. This is far more than a limitation! As a reader, I need to know what data were not available and why. State unemployment rate data are readily available. Coronavirus infection rates (and hospitalizations and deaths) are broadcast on the evening news every day. Why were some states excluded and which were they?

The next two sections – Literature Review and The Model – did not contain enough material (or enough clearly communicated material) to warrant additional points.

Literature Review

Your literature review does not go into sufficient detail for me to understand the findings reported in the various studies and the methodology used. I would have preferred a more detailed discussion of two papers (which is what you were required to use) than a cursory review of nine.

Model

I’ve already covered this section when discussing data above.