IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/11280.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Can Business Owners Form Accurate Counterfactuals? Eliciting Treatment and Control Beliefs about Their Outcomes in the Alternat

Author

Listed:
  • McKenzie, David

Abstract

A survey of participants in a large-scale business plan competition experiment, in which winners received an average of US$50,000 each, is used to elicit beliefs about what the outcomes would have been in the alternative treatment status. Participants are asked the percent chance they would be operating a firm, and the number of employees and monthly sales they would have, had their treatment status been reversed. The study finds the control group to have reasonably accurate expectations of the large treatment effect they would experience on the likelihood of operating a firm, although this may reflect the treatment effect being close to an upper bound. The control group dramatically overestimates how much winning would help them grow the size of their firm. The treatment group overestimates how much winning helps their chance of running a business, and also overestimates how much winning helps them grow their firms. In addition, these counterfactual expectations appear unable to generate accurate relative rankings of which groups of participants benefit most from treatment.

Suggested Citation

  • McKenzie, David, 2016. "Can Business Owners Form Accurate Counterfactuals? Eliciting Treatment and Control Beliefs about Their Outcomes in the Alternat," CEPR Discussion Papers 11280, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:11280
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP11280
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles F. Manski, 2004. "Measuring Expectations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(5), pages 1329-1376, September.
    2. Martin Ravallion, 2014. "Can We Trust Shoestring Evaluations?," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 28(3), pages 413-431.
    3. McKenzie, David & Gibson, John & Stillman, Steven, 2013. "A land of milk and honey with streets paved with gold: Do emigrants have over-optimistic expectations about incomes abroad?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 116-127.
    4. Rinku Murgai & Martin Ravallion & Dominique van de Walle, 2016. "Is Workfare Cost-effective against Poverty in a Poor Labor-Surplus Economy?," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 30(3), pages 413-445.
    5. David McKenzie, 2011. "How Can We Learn Whether Firm Policies Are Working in Africa? Challenges (and Solutions?) For Experiments and Structural Models -super-†," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 20(4), pages 600-625, August.
    6. Delavande, Adeline & Giné, Xavier & McKenzie, David, 2011. "Measuring subjective expectations in developing countries: A critical review and new evidence," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 151-163, March.
    7. McKenzie, David, 2011. "How can we learn whether firm policies are working in africa ? challenges (and solutions?) for experiments and structural models," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5632, The World Bank.
    8. Randall A. Lewis & Justin M. Rao, 2015. "The Unfavorable Economics of Measuring the Returns to Advertising," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(4), pages 1941-1973.
    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. Brian Blackburn & Aprajit Mahajan & Alessandro Tarozzi & Joanne Yoong, "undated". "Bednets, Information and Malaria in Orissa," Discussion Papers 08-025, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    2. Romuald Meango & Esther Mirjam Girsberger, 2023. "Identification of Ex ante Returns Using Elicited Choice Probabilities: an Application to Preferences for Public-sector Jobs," Papers 2303.03009, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    3. Orazio Attanasio & Katja Kaufmann, 2009. "Educational Choices, Subjective Expectations, and Credit Constraints," NBER Working Papers 15087, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Adeline Delavande & Jinkook Lee & Seetha Menon, 2017. "Eliciting Survival Expectations of the Elderly in Low-Income Countries: Evidence From India," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 54(2), pages 673-699, April.
    5. Thornton, Rebecca L., 2012. "HIV testing, subjective beliefs and economic behavior," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 300-313.
    6. Markus Eyting & Patrick Schmidt, 2019. "Belief Elicitation with Multiple Point Predictions," Working Papers 1818, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, revised 16 Nov 2020.
    7. Eyting, Markus & Schmidt, Patrick, 2021. "Belief elicitation with multiple point predictions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    8. Crump, Richard K. & Eusepi, Stefano & Tambalotti, Andrea & Topa, Giorgio, 2022. "Subjective intertemporal substitution," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 118-133.
    9. Joan Costa-Font & Cristina Vilaplana-Prieto, 2022. "Biased survival expectations and behaviours: Does domain specific information matter?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(3), pages 285-317, December.
    10. Jos'e Raimundo Carvalho & Diego de Maria Andr'e & Yuri Costa, 2023. "Individual Updating of Subjective Probability of Homicide Victimization: a "Natural Experiment'' on Risk Communication," Papers 2312.08171, arXiv.org.
    11. Cavapozzi, Danilo & Francesconi, Marco & Nicoletti, Cheti, 2024. "Dividing Housework between Partners: Individual Preferences and Social Norms," IZA Discussion Papers 17370, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Axel Demenet, 2016. "Does Managerial Capital also Matter Among Micro and Small Firms in Developing Countries?," Working Papers DT/2016/12, DIAL (Développement, Institutions et Mondialisation).
    13. Lekfuangfu, Warn N., 2022. "Mortality risk, perception, and human capital investments: The legacy of landmines in Cambodia," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    14. Yokoo, Hide-Fumi & Arimura, Toshi H. & Chattopadhyay, Mriduchhanda & Katayama, Hajime, 2023. "Subjective risk belief function in the field: Evidence from cooking fuel choices and health in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    15. Delavande, Adeline & Giné, Xavier & McKenzie, David, 2011. "Measuring subjective expectations in developing countries: A critical review and new evidence," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 151-163, March.
    16. Habtamu Tilahun Kassahun & Bo Jellesmark Thorsen & Joffre Swait & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen, 2020. "Social Cooperation in the Context of Integrated Private and Common Land Management," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(1), pages 105-136, January.
    17. Abi Adams & Alison Andrew, 2019. "Preferences and beliefs in the marriage market for young brides," IFS Working Papers W19/05, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    18. Ondřej Dvouletý & Stjepan Srhoj & Smaranda Pantea, 2021. "Public SME grants and firm performance in European Union: A systematic review of empirical evidence," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 57(1), pages 243-263, June.
    19. Kettlewell, Nathan & Walker, Matthew J. & Yoo, Hong Il, 2024. "Alternative Models of Preference Heterogeneity for Elicited Choice Probabilities," IZA Discussion Papers 16821, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Carole Treibich, 2015. ""Your Money or Your Life !" The Influence of Injury and Fine Expectations on Helmet Adoption among Motorcyclists in Delhi," AMSE Working Papers 1546, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France, revised 16 Nov 2015.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Counterfactual elicitation; Subjective expectations; Randomized experiment; Business growth;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • D22 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
    • C80 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - General
    • C31 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models; Quantile Regressions; Social Interaction Models
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments

    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:cpr:ceprdp:11280. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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.