IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/psewpa/halshs-00834169.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Robustness of the encouragement design in a two-treatment randomized control trial

Author

Listed:
  • Luc Behaghel

    (PSE - Paris-Jourdan Sciences Economiques - ENS Paris - École normale supérieure - Paris - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, PSE - Paris School of Economics, CREST - Centre de Recherche en Économie et Statistique - ENSAE ParisTech - École Nationale de la Statistique et de l'Administration Économique)

  • Bruno Crépon

    (CREST - Centre de Recherche en Économie et Statistique - ENSAE ParisTech - École Nationale de la Statistique et de l'Administration Économique)

  • Marc Gurgand

    (PSE - Paris-Jourdan Sciences Economiques - ENS Paris - École normale supérieure - Paris - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, PSE - Paris School of Economics, CREST - Centre de Recherche en Économie et Statistique - ENSAE ParisTech - École Nationale de la Statistique et de l'Administration Économique)

Abstract

In this paper we discuss how the " encouragement design "used in randomized controlled trials can be extended to a setting with two treatments and one control group. Conditions to interpret the Two-Stage Least Squares (TSLS) estimates causally are stronger than in the case with only one treatment and one control group. A rst case where a causal interpretation holds is when only those assigned to one of the two treatments can e ectively enter the corresponding program. A second case is when there are always takers. In that second case, entry rates into a given program should be the same among those assigned to the control group and those assigned to the other program; this restriction can be tested from the data. In cases where the restriction is rejected, we derive bounds to the Local Average Treatment E ect (LATE) based on weaker monotonicity conditions. We illustrate the results using data from a large randomized experiment where job seekers at risk of long term unemployment can receive a reinforced counseling scheme o ered either by the public or the private sector, or remain on a standard track.

Suggested Citation

  • Luc Behaghel & Bruno Crépon & Marc Gurgand, 2013. "Robustness of the encouragement design in a two-treatment randomized control trial," PSE Working Papers halshs-00834169, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:psewpa:halshs-00834169
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00834169
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00834169/document
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luc Behaghel & Bruno Cr?pon & Marc Gurgand, 2014. "Private and Public Provision of Counseling to Job Seekers: Evidence from a Large Controlled Experiment," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 6(4), pages 142-174, October.
    2. David S. Lee, 2009. "Training, Wages, and Sample Selection: Estimating Sharp Bounds on Treatment Effects," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 76(3), pages 1071-1102.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lars Kirkebøen & Edwin Leuven & Magne Mogstad, 2014. "Field of Study, Earnings, and Self-Selection," NBER Working Papers 20816, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Patrick Kline & Christopher R. Walters, 2016. "Evaluating Public Programs with Close Substitutes: The Case of HeadStart," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 131(4), pages 1795-1848.
    3. repec:wly:emetrp:v:85:y:2017:i::p:1373-1432 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Atila Abdulkadiroğlu & Joshua D. Angrist & Yusuke Narita & Parag A. Pathak, 2017. "Research Design Meets Market Design: Using Centralized Assignment for Impact Evaluation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 1373-1432, September.
    5. Huber, Martin & Wüthrich, Kaspar, 2017. "Evaluating local average and quantile treatment effects under endogeneity based on instruments: a review," FSES Working Papers 479, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Randomized evaluation; Local Average Treatment E ffect; Bounds;

    JEL classification:

    • J64 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Mobility, Unemployment, Vacancies, and Immigrant Workers - - - Unemployment: Models, Duration, Incidence, and Job Search
    • J68 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Mobility, Unemployment, Vacancies, and Immigrant Workers - - - Public Policy
    • H44 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Publicly Provided Goods: Mixed Markets

    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:hal:psewpa:halshs-00834169. 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: (CCSD). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.