IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v628y2010i1p112-131.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reporting Methodological Items in Randomized Experiments in Political Science

Author

Listed:
  • Isabelle Boutron

    (CONSORT Statements for nonpharmacological treatments)

  • Peter John

    (Institute for Political and Economic Governance (IPEG) in the School of Social Sciences at the University of Manchester, UK)

  • David J. Torgerson

    (York Trials Unit)

Abstract

This article discusses the arguments for using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) procedures in political science field experiments, with the aim of improving the clarity and transparency of research work and reducing the possibility of bias. The article reviews the background to CONSORT, which is increasingly required for carrying out and reporting trials in healthcare and other disciplines. It sets out the main elements of the scheme and then applies its criteria to evaluate a published Get Out the Vote (GOTV) study by John and Brannan (2008). The CONSORT checklist shows the methods in this article to be clear and transparent but that CONSORT could improve the reporting of turnout experiments, such as details of the numbers going through the trial at each stage. The article argues that applying CONSORT to reports of trials in political science journals is a feasible and desirable objective.

Suggested Citation

  • Isabelle Boutron & Peter John & David J. Torgerson, 2010. "Reporting Methodological Items in Randomized Experiments in Political Science," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 628(1), pages 112-131, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:628:y:2010:i:1:p:112-131
    DOI: 10.1177/0002716209351518
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716209351518
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0002716209351518?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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:sae:anname:v:628:y:2010:i:1:p:112-131. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.