IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Making the Most Out Of Social Experiments: Reducing the Intrinsic Uncertainty in Evidence from Randomized Trials with an Application to the JTPA Exp

  • Nancy Clements
  • James Heckman
  • Jeffrey Smith

This paper demonstrates that even under ideal conditions, social experiments in general only uniquely determine the mean impacts of programs but not the median or the distribution of program impacts. The conventional common parameter evaluation model widely used in econometrics is one case where experiments uniquely determine joint the distribution of program impacts. That model assumes that everyone responds to a social program in the same way. Allowing for heterogeneous responses to programs, the data from social experiments are consistent with a wide variety of alternative impact distribution. We discuss why it is interesting to know the distribution of program impacts. We propose and implement a variety of different ways of incorporating prior information to reduce the wide variability intrinsic in experimental data. Robust Bayesian methods and deconvolution methods are developed and applied. We analyze earnings and employment data on adult women from a recent social experiment. In order to produce plausible impact distributions, it is necessary to impose strong positive dependence between outcomes in the treatment and in the control distributions. Such dependence is an outcome of certain optimizing models of the program participation decision.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Technical Working Papers with number 0149.

in new window

Date of creation: Jan 1994
Date of revision:
Publication status: published as Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 64, no. 4 (1997): 487-536.
Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberte:0149
Note: LS
Contact details of provider: Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.
Phone: 617-868-3900
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberte:0149. 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: ()

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.