1

I using ltabulex for my long table. The table is coming out fine, but the caption is not being displayed above the table. Does anyone know why?

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{tabularx}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{multirow}
\usepackage{ltxtable}
\usepackage{ltablex}
\usepackage(tabularx)
\begin{document}

\begin{ltablex}
\small
  \caption{Summary of Multipliers}\label{Lit Summary table}
    \begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{p{2cm}p{2cm}XX}
    \hline\hline
    \textbf{Study} & \textbf{Geographical Location and Level} & \textbf{Identification} & \textbf{Multiplier Result} \\ \hline \hline
    \citeA{acconcia2014mafia} & Italy Local Level & Looked at a situation when local governments were dismissed and public funding was severely reduced in Italy is response to being infiltrated by the mafia.   & 1.5 on impact, growing to 1.9 when dynamic effects are included. \\ \hline
    \citeA{auerbach} & US Federal Level & Extended SVAR approach & 0-0.5 in Expansion and 1.0-1.5 in Recession \\ \hline \citeA{Barro} & US Federal Level & Spending multipliers are identified primarily from variations in defense spending, especially changes associated with buildups and aftermaths of wars. & 0.4-0.5 contemporaneously, 0.6-0.7 2 years later and if multiplier is permanent then this adds 0.1-0.2 to the multiplier  \\ \hline \citeA{Clemens2012} & US State Level & Instrumented on the variation in the strictness states' balanced budget requirements to determine the level as a means of measuring the level of spending cuts during a recession & 0.4 however it may be higher if states receive windfall funding \\ \hline \citeA{fazzari2015state} & US State Level & Bayesian model comparison and generalized impulse response analysis to test for nonlinearities in the responses of output to government spending & 0.8 for states with low slack and 1.6 for states with high slack \\ \hline \citeA{fishback2015multiplier} & US State Level & Panel of annual Federal expenditure in each State during the 1930s & 0.96 when Federal transfer payments are excluded falling to 0.83 when they are included  \\ \hline \citeA{Ilzetzki} & 44 countries around the world (20 high-income and 24 low income) & SVAR approach on a novel dataset & High income countries tend to have a statistically significant positive fiscal multiplier while the opposite is true of developing countries and Investment in infrastructure could lead to a higher multiplier \\ \hline \citeA{michaillat2014theory} & US Federal Level & Simple search-and-matching model to highlight the key economic forces of the multiplier & The multiplier doubles when unemployment rises from 5\% to 8\% \\ \hline  \citeA{nakamura2014fiscal} & US State Level & Instrumented on the fact that when national spending on the military rises by 1 percentage point of GDP in the US, different states, depending on their exposure to military spending, experience different levels of military build-up & 1.5 growing to 2.0 at zero lower bound \\ \hline     \citeA{ramey2011identifying} & US Federal Level & Looked at the military build-up during significant wars throughout the 20\textsuperscript{th} century in the US &  0.6-1.2 \\ \hline   \citeA{Ramey2018} & US Federal Level & Analysed quarterly US data over a 120 year period using the local projection method developed by \citeA{Jorda} & 0.3-1.5 depending on the methodology and robustness check they used.  \\ \hline \citeA{shoag2010impact} & US State Level & Instrumented on the windfall gains that US states receive from investing public pension funds & Baseline multiplier over 2, rising to over 3 in times of economic slack \\ \hline \citeA{suarez2016estimating} & US County Level & Instrumented on Federal transfers to local counties due to changes in population forecasts between Census and Non-census years & 1.7-2 rising in counties experiencing economic slack \\ \hline 
    \end{tabularx}
\end{ltablex}

\end{document}
  • 2
    1) Its \usepackage{tabularx}, not \usepackage(tabularx). 2) You are missing a \ in begin{ltablex}. 3) It's \end{document}, not \end(document). 4) The environment ltablex does not exist; replace \begin{ltablex} by \begin{table} and \end{ltablex} by \end{table}. – Phelype Oleinik May 26 at 14:48
  • Did you try to compile the code that you show here? Please make sure that it compiles and is free of obvious mistakes. – Dr. Manuel Kuehner May 26 at 15:32
  • Phelype gave you three items that are wrong in your code, and you fixed just one. How are we supposed to help you if you ignore the advice given to you? – Johannes_B May 27 at 5:49
  • @PhelypeOleinik I fixed up the code as per your suggestion but your last point about changing ltablex to table does not work as it simply makes the table disappear. I am using a long table and I simply want the caption to pop up above the table – Asaf Cohen May 27 at 5:51
  • @Johannes_B It's all fixed up now except for the last point as that causes the table to disappear – Asaf Cohen May 27 at 5:52
1

Use package xltabular and the environment of the same name:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{multirow}
\usepackage{xltabular}

\begin{document}

\small
\begin{xltabular}{\textwidth}{l p{2cm}XX}
\caption{Summary of Multipliers}\label{Lit Summary table}\\\hline\hline
\textbf{Study} & \textbf{Geographical Location and Level} & \textbf{Identification} & \textbf{Multiplier 
Result} \\ \hline \hline
\cite{acconcia2014mafia} & Italy Local Level & Looked at a situation when local governments were dismissed 
and public funding was severely reduced in Italy is response to being infiltrated by the mafia.   & 1.5 on 
impact, growing to 1.9 when dynamic effects are included. \\ \hline
\cite{auerbach} & US Federal Level & Extended SVAR approach & 0-0.5 in Expansion and 1.0-1.5 in Recession \\ 
\hline \cite{Barro} & US Federal Level & Spending multipliers are identified primarily from variations in 
defense spending, especially changes associated with buildups and aftermaths of wars. & 0.4-0.5 
contemporaneously, 0.6-0.7 2 years later and if multiplier is permanent then this adds 0.1-0.2 to the 
multiplier  \\ \hline 
\cite{Clemens2012} & US State Level & Instrumented on the variation in the strictness states' balanced budget 
requirements to determine the level as a means of measuring the level of spending cuts during a recession & 
0.4 however it may be higher if states receive windfall funding \\ \hline 
\cite{fazzari2015state} & US State Level & Bayesian model comparison and generalized impulse response 
analysis to test for nonlinearities in the responses of output to government spending & 0.8 for states with 
low slack and 1.6 for states with high slack \\ \hline 
\cite{fishback2015multiplier} & US State Level & Panel of annual Federal expenditure in each State during the 
1930s & 0.96 when Federal transfer payments are excluded falling to 0.83 when they are included  \\ \hline 
\cite{Ilzetzki} & 44 countries around the world (20 high-income and 24 low income) & SVAR approach on a novel 
dataset & High income countries tend to have a statistically significant positive fiscal multiplier while the 
opposite is true of developing countries and Investment in infrastructure could lead to a higher multiplier 
\\ \hline \cite{michaillat2014theory} & US Federal Level & Simple search-and-matching model to highlight the 
key economic forces of the multiplier & The multiplier doubles when unemployment rises from 5\% to 8\% \\ 
\hline  
\cite{nakamura2014fiscal} & US State Level & Instrumented on the fact that when national spending on the 
military rises by 1 percentage point of GDP in the US, different states, depending on their exposure to 
military spending, experience different levels of military build-up & 1.5 growing to 2.0 at zero lower bound 
\\ \hline     
\cite{ramey2011identifying} & US Federal Level & Looked at the military build-up during significant wars 
throughout the 20\textsuperscript{th} century in the US &  0.6-1.2 \\ \hline   
\cite{Ramey2018} & US Federal Level & Analysed quarterly US data over a 120 year period using the local 
projection method developed by \cite{Jorda} & 0.3-1.5 depending on the methodology and robustness check they 
used.  \\ \hline 
\cite{shoag2010impact} & US State Level & Instrumented on the windfall gains that US states receive from 
investing public pension funds & Baseline multiplier over 2, rising to over 3 in times of economic slack \\ 
\hline 
\cite{suarez2016estimating} & US County Level & Instrumented on Federal transfers to local counties due to 
changes in population forecasts between Census and Non-census years & 1.7-2 rising in counties experiencing 
economic slack \\ \hline 
\end{xltabular}

\end{document}

the first page:

enter image description here

If you cannot use xltabular (e.g. at Overleaf) then use package ltablex:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{multirow}
\usepackage{ltablex}

\begin{document}

    \small
    \begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{l p{2cm}XX}
        \caption{Summary of Multipliers}\label{Lit Summary table}\\\hline\hline
        \textbf{Study} & \textbf{Geographical Location and Level} & \textbf{Identification} & 
        \textbf{Multiplier 
            Result} \\ \hline \hline
        \cite{acconcia2014mafia} & Italy Local Level & Looked at a situation when local governments were 
        dismissed 
        and public funding was severely reduced in Italy is response to being infiltrated by the mafia.   & 
        1.5 on 
        impact, growing to 1.9 when dynamic effects are included. \\ \hline
        \cite{auerbach} & US Federal Level & Extended SVAR approach & 0-0.5 in Expansion and 1.0-1.5 in 
        Recession \\ 
        \hline \cite{Barro} & US Federal Level & Spending multipliers are identified primarily from 
        variations in 
        defense spending, especially changes associated with buildups and aftermaths of wars. & 0.4-0.5 
        contemporaneously, 0.6-0.7 2 years later and if multiplier is permanent then this adds 0.1-0.2 to the 
        multiplier  \\ \hline 
        \cite{Clemens2012} & US State Level & Instrumented on the variation in the strictness states' 
        balanced budget 
        requirements to determine the level as a means of measuring the level of spending cuts during a 
        recession & 
        0.4 however it may be higher if states receive windfall funding \\ \hline 
        \cite{fazzari2015state} & US State Level & Bayesian model comparison and generalized impulse response 
        analysis to test for nonlinearities in the responses of output to government spending & 0.8 for 
        states with 
        low slack and 1.6 for states with high slack \\ \hline 
        \cite{fishback2015multiplier} & US State Level & Panel of annual Federal expenditure in each State 
        during the 
        1930s & 0.96 when Federal transfer payments are excluded falling to 0.83 when they are included  \\ 
        \hline 
        \cite{Ilzetzki} & 44 countries around the world (20 high-income and 24 low income) & SVAR approach on 
        a novel 
        dataset & High income countries tend to have a statistically significant positive fiscal multiplier 
        while the 
        opposite is true of developing countries and Investment in infrastructure could lead to a higher 
        multiplier 
        \\ \hline \cite{michaillat2014theory} & US Federal Level & Simple search-and-matching model to 
        highlight the 
        key economic forces of the multiplier & The multiplier doubles when unemployment rises from 5\% to 
        8\% \\ 
        \hline  
        \cite{nakamura2014fiscal} & US State Level & Instrumented on the fact that when national spending on 
        the 
        military rises by 1 percentage point of GDP in the US, different states, depending on their exposure 
        to 
        military spending, experience different levels of military build-up & 1.5 growing to 2.0 at zero 
        lower bound 
        \\ \hline     
        \cite{ramey2011identifying} & US Federal Level & Looked at the military build-up during significant 
        wars 
        throughout the 20\textsuperscript{th} century in the US &  0.6-1.2 \\ \hline   
        \cite{Ramey2018} & US Federal Level & Analysed quarterly US data over a 120 year period using the 
        local 
        projection method developed by \cite{Jorda} & 0.3-1.5 depending on the methodology and robustness 
        check they 
        used.  \\ \hline 
        \cite{shoag2010impact} & US State Level & Instrumented on the windfall gains that US states receive 
        from 
        investing public pension funds & Baseline multiplier over 2, rising to over 3 in times of economic 
        slack \\ 
        \hline 
        \cite{suarez2016estimating} & US County Level & Instrumented on Federal transfers to local counties 
        due to 
        changes in population forecasts between Census and Non-census years & 1.7-2 rising in counties 
        experiencing 
        economic slack \\ \hline 
    \end{tabularx}

\end{document}
  • I am using Overleaf and it does not recognise the package xltabular meaning I cannot implement this environment. – Asaf Cohen May 27 at 6:47
  • then use package ltablex. See my edited answer. – user187802 May 28 at 9:00
0

By changing ltablex to table, your code is working, but your code having some errors, I've changed \citeA to \cite, hope you may have the definition for \citeA tag. Please refer the below modified tag:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{multirow}
\usepackage{ltxtable}
\usepackage{ltablex}
\usepackage{tabularx}

\begin{document}

\begin{table}
\small
  \caption{Summary of Multipliers}\label{Lit Summary table}
    \begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{p{2cm}p{2cm}XX}
    \hline\hline
    \textbf{Study} & \textbf{Geographical Location and Level} & \textbf{Identification} & \textbf{Multiplier Result} \\ \hline \hline
    \cite{acconcia2014mafia} & Italy Local Level & Looked at a situation when local governments were dismissed and public funding was severely reduced in Italy is response to being infiltrated by the mafia.   & 1.5 on impact, growing to 1.9 when dynamic effects are included. \\ \hline
    \cite{auerbach} & US Federal Level & Extended SVAR approach & 0-0.5 in Expansion and 1.0-1.5 in Recession \\ \hline \cite{Barro} & US Federal Level & Spending multipliers are identified primarily from variations in defense spending, especially changes associated with buildups and aftermaths of wars. & 0.4-0.5 contemporaneously, 0.6-0.7 2 years later and if multiplier is permanent then this adds 0.1-0.2 to the multiplier  \\ \hline \cite{Clemens2012} & US State Level & Instrumented on the variation in the strictness states' balanced budget requirements to determine the level as a means of measuring the level of spending cuts during a recession & 0.4 however it may be higher if states receive windfall funding \\ \hline \cite{fazzari2015state} & US State Level & Bayesian model comparison and generalized impulse response analysis to test for nonlinearities in the responses of output to government spending & 0.8 for states with low slack and 1.6 for states with high slack \\ \hline \cite{fishback2015multiplier} & US State Level & Panel of annual Federal expenditure in each State during the 1930s & 0.96 when Federal transfer payments are excluded falling to 0.83 when they are included  \\ \hline \cite{Ilzetzki} & 44 countries around the world (20 high-income and 24 low income) & SVAR approach on a novel dataset & High income countries tend to have a statistically significant positive fiscal multiplier while the opposite is true of developing countries and Investment in infrastructure could lead to a higher multiplier \\ \hline \cite{michaillat2014theory} & US Federal Level & Simple search-and-matching model to highlight the key economic forces of the multiplier & The multiplier doubles when unemployment rises from 5\% to 8\% \\ \hline  \cite{nakamura2014fiscal} & US State Level & Instrumented on the fact that when national spending on the military rises by 1 percentage point of GDP in the US, different states, depending on their exposure to military spending, experience different levels of military build-up & 1.5 growing to 2.0 at zero lower bound \\ \hline     \cite{ramey2011identifying} & US Federal Level & Looked at the military build-up during significant wars throughout the 20\textsuperscript{th} century in the US &  0.6-1.2 \\ \hline   \cite{Ramey2018} & US Federal Level & Analysed quarterly US data over a 120 year period using the local projection method developed by \cite{Jorda} & 0.3-1.5 depending on the methodology and robustness check they used.  \\ \hline \cite{shoag2010impact} & US State Level & Instrumented on the windfall gains that US states receive from investing public pension funds & Baseline multiplier over 2, rising to over 3 in times of economic slack \\ \hline \cite{suarez2016estimating} & US County Level & Instrumented on Federal transfers to local counties due to changes in population forecasts between Census and Non-census years & 1.7-2 rising in counties experiencing economic slack \\ \hline 
    \end{tabularx}
\end{table}

\end{document}
  • I bet the OP will complain that the table is gone again, since this is a floating environment. :-) – Johannes_B May 27 at 6:19
  • @Johannes_B But I could see the table view... – MadyYuvi May 27 at 6:20
  • The OP quite likely has a bigger document. – Johannes_B May 27 at 6:22

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.