IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v37y2013i3-4p197-212.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nonresponse Bias in Randomized Controlled Experiments in Criminology

Author

Listed:
  • Emma Antrobus
  • Henk Elffers
  • Gentry White
  • Lorraine Mazerolle

Abstract

Objectives: The goal of this article is to examine whether or not the results of the Queensland Community Engagement Trial (QCET)—a randomized controlled trial that tested the impact of procedural justice policing on citizen attitudes toward police—were affected by different types of nonresponse bias. Method: We use two methods (Cochrane and Elffers methods) to explore nonresponse bias: First, we assess the impact of the low response rate by examining the effects of nonresponse group differences between the experimental and control conditions and pooled variance under different scenarios. Second, we assess the degree to which item response rates are influenced by the control and experimental conditions. Results: Our analysis of the QCET data suggests that our substantive findings are not influenced by the low response rate in the trial. The results are robust even under extreme conditions, and statistical significance of the results would only be compromised in cases where the pooled variance was much larger for the nonresponse group and the difference between experimental and control conditions was greatly diminished. We also find that there were no biases in the item response rates across the experimental and control conditions. Conclusion: RCTs that involve field survey responses—like QCET—are potentially compromised by low response rates and how item response rates might be influenced by the control or experimental conditions. Our results show that the QCET results were not sensitive to the overall low response rate across the experimental and control conditions and the item response rates were not significantly different across the experimental and control groups. Overall, our analysis suggests that the results of QCET are robust and any biases in the survey responses do not significantly influence the main experimental findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Emma Antrobus & Henk Elffers & Gentry White & Lorraine Mazerolle, 2013. "Nonresponse Bias in Randomized Controlled Experiments in Criminology," Evaluation Review, , vol. 37(3-4), pages 197-212, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:37:y:2013:i:3-4:p:197-212
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X13518534
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X13518534
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X13518534?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:evarev:v:37:y:2013:i:3-4:p:197-212. 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.