Subject Evaluation in Social Experiments
AbstractThis paper concerns inferring how self-interested subjects, as opposed to altruistic investigators, evaluate treatments in social experiments. The authors argue that the attrition behavior of subjects reveals their evaluation and discuss the usefulness of using such data in performing subject-based evaluation. The authors study the causes of disagreements between investigators and subjects in evaluating treatments and empirically assess the degree to which they disagree. The paper provides an empirical framework for estimating the systematic level of disagreement in the presence of such errors. Using clinical trials, the authors find substantial evidence of overapproval by investigators in about one-third of the trials analyzed.
Download InfoTo our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Econometric Society in its journal Econometrica.
Volume (Year): 66 (1998)
Issue (Month): 2 (March)
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Philipson, Tomas & Malani, Anup, 1999. "Measurement errors: A principal investigator-agent approach," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 273-298, August.
- Grasdal, A., 2001.
"The Performance of Sample Selection Estimators to Control for Attrition Bias,"
Norway; Department of Economics, University of Bergen
225, Department of Economics, University of Bergen.
- Astrid Grasdal, 2001. "The performance of sample selection estimators to control for attrition bias," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(5), pages 385-398.
- Grasdal, A., 2000. "The Performance of Sample Selection Estimators to Control for Attrition Bias," Norway; Department of Economics, University of Bergen 0101, Department of Economics, University of Bergen.
- Paul Ellickson & Scott Stern & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2001.
"Patient Welfare and Patient Compliance -- An Empirical Framework for Measuring the Benefits from Pharmaceutical Innovation,"
in: Medical Care Output and Productivity, pages 539-564
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Paul Ellickson & Scott Stern & Manuel Trajtenberg, 1999. "Patient Welfare and Patient Compliance: An Empirical Framework for Measuring the Benefits from Pharmaceutical Innovation," NBER Working Papers 6890, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- John List & David Reiley, 2008.
Artefactual Field Experiments
00091, The Field Experiments Website.
- Karine Lamiraud & Pierre-Yves Geoffard, 2006.
"Therapeutic non adherence: a rational behavior revealing patient preferences ?,"
PSE Working Papers
- Karine Lamiraud & Pierre-Yves Geoffard, 2007. "Therapeutic non-adherence: a rational behavior revealing patient preferences?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(11), pages 1185-1204.
- Chassang, Sylvain & Padró i Miquel, Gerard & Snowberg, Erik, 2010.
"Selective Trials: A Principal-Agent Approach to Randomized Controlled Experiments,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
8003, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Sylvain Chassang & Gerard Padro I Miquel & Erik Snowberg, 2012. "Selective Trials: A Principal-Agent Approach to Randomized Controlled Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1279-1309, June.
- Sylvain Chassang & Gerard Padro i Miquel & Erik Snowberg, 2010. "Selective Trials: A Principal-Agent Approach to Randomized Controlled Experiments," NBER Working Papers 16343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Tomas Philipson, 1999.
"Economic Epidemiology and Infectious Diseases,"
NBER Working Papers
7037, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Rohlfs, Chris & Sullivan, Ryan & Kniesner, Thomas J., 2013. "Hedonic Estimation under Very General Conditions Using Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs," IZA Discussion Papers 7554, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.