IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/102940.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Misbehaving’ RCTs: the confounding problem of human agency

Author

Listed:
  • Kabeer, Naila

Abstract

This paper argues that the theoretical model of causal inference underpinning RCTs is frequently undermined by the failure of different actors involved in their implementation to behave in ways required by the model. This is not a problem unique to RCTs, but it poses a greater challenge to them because it undercuts their claims to methodological superiority based on the ‘clean identification’ of causal effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Kabeer, Naila, 2020. "Misbehaving’ RCTs: the confounding problem of human agency," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102940, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:102940
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/102940/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Shaffer, 2011. "Against Excessive Rhetoric in Impact Assessment: Overstating the Case for Randomised Controlled Experiments," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(11), pages 1619-1635.
    2. N/A, 2015. "Books for review," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 29(5), pages 890-890, October.
    3. Christopher B. Barrett & Michael R. Carter, 2010. "The Power and Pitfalls of Experiments in Development Economics: Some Non-random Reflections," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 32(4), pages 515-548.
    4. N/A, 2011. "Books For Review," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 25(1), pages 190-190, March.
    5. Naila Kabeer, 2019. "Randomized Control Trials and Qualitative Evaluations of a Multifaceted Programme for Women in Extreme Poverty: Empirical Findings and Methodological Reflections," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 197-217, April.
    6. White, Howard, 2009. "Theory-Based Impact Evaluation," 3ie Publications 2009-3, International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie).
    7. N/A, 2015. "Books for review," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 29(4), pages 699-699, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kabeer, Naila, 2020. "‘Misbehaving’ RCTs: The confounding problem of human agency," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    2. Vincenzo Sforza & Riccardo Cimini & Alessandro Mechelli & Taryn Vian, 2021. "A Review of the Literature on Corruption in Healthcare Organizations," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 15(4), pages 1-98, July.
    3. Florent Bédécarrats & Isabelle Guérin & François Roubaud, 2015. "The gold standard for randomized evaluations: from discussion of method to political economy," Working Papers DT/2015/01, DIAL (Développement, Institutions et Mondialisation).
    4. Florent Bedecarrats & Isabelle Guérin & François Roubaud, 2017. "L'étalon-or des évaluations randomisées : du discours de la méthode à l'économie politique," Working Papers ird-01445209, HAL.
    5. McHugh, Neil & Biosca, Olga & Donaldson, Cam, 2015. "Microfinance, health and randomised trials," Health Economics Working Paper Series 201501, Glasgow Caledonian University, Yunus Centre.
    6. Nico Ravanilla & Allen Hicken, 2021. "Poverty, social networks, and clientelism," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2021-144, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    7. Colin Kirkpatrick, 2012. "Economic Governance: Improving the Economic and Regulatory Environment for Supporting Private Sector Activity," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2012-108, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    8. Willan, Samantha & Gibbs, Andrew & Shai, Nwabisa & Ntini, Nolwazi & Petersen, Inge & Jewkes, Rachel, 2020. "Did young women in South African informal settlements display increased agency after participating in the Stepping Stones and Creating Futures intervention? A qualitative evaluation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    9. Florent Bédécarrats & Isabelle Guérin & François Roubaud, 2019. "All that Glitters is not Gold. The Political Economy of Randomized Evaluations in Development," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 50(3), pages 735-762, May.
    10. Kabeer, Naila, 2020. "Women’s empowerment and economic development: a feminist critique of story telling practices in ‘Randomista' economics," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103880, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Yonatan Eyal, 2020. "Self-Assessment Variables as a Source of Information in the Evaluation of Intervention Programs: A Theoretical and Methodological Framework," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(1), pages 21582440198, January.
    12. Florent Bédécarrats & Isabelle Guérin & François Roubaud, 2015. "The gold standard for randomised evaluations: from discussion of method to political economics," Working Papers CEB 15-009, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    13. Jorge Calero & Rosario Ivano Scandurra, 2016. "Modelling adult skills in OECD countries," Working Papers 2016/17, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    14. Neal, Luke, 2021. "Ecological contradictions of Labour's Green New Deal," IPE Working Papers 152/2021, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute for International Political Economy (IPE).
    15. W.F. Lawless, 2019. "Interdependence, Morality and Human-Machine Teams: The Revenge of the Dualists," Scientia Moralitas Journal, Scientia Moralitas, Research Institute, vol. 4(1), pages 31-50, July.
    16. Kabeer, Naila, 2020. "Women's Empowerment and Economic Development: A Feminist Critique of Storytelling Practices in "Randomista" Economics: a feminist critique of storytelling practices in “randomista” economics," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 104600, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Florent BEDECARRATS & Isabelle GUERIN & François ROUBAUD, 2017. "L'étalon-or des évaluations randomisées : économie politique des expérimentations aléatoires dans le domaine du développement," Working Paper 753120cd-506f-4c5f-80ed-7, Agence française de développement.
    18. Vikram Tyagi & Sophie Webber, 2021. "A rusting gold standard: Failures in an Indonesian RCT, and the implications for poverty reduction," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 53(5), pages 992-1011, August.
    19. Lanfranchi, Gabriel & Herrero, Ana Carolina & Palenzuela, Salvador Rueda & Camilloni, Inés & Bauer, Steffen, 2018. "The new urban paradigm," Economics Discussion Papers 2018-70, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    20. Sylvain Chassang & Erik Snowberg & Ben Seymour & Cayley Bowles, 2015. "Accounting for Behavior in Treatment Effects: New Applications for Blind Trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:102940. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.