Subject Evaluation in Social Experiments
This 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.
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
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.
Volume (Year): 66 (1998)
Issue (Month): 2 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Phone: 1 212 998 3820|
Fax: 1 212 995 4487
Web page: http://www.econometricsociety.org/Email:
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:|| Web: https://www.econometricsociety.org/publications/econometrica/access/ordering-back-issues Email: |
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ecm:emetrp:v:66:y:1998:i:2:p:381-408. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
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.