IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/26993.html

In Praise of Moderation: Suggestions for the Scope and Use of Pre-Analysis Plans for RCTs in Economics

Author

Listed:
  • Abhijit Banerjee
  • Esther Duflo
  • Amy Finkelstein
  • Lawrence F. Katz
  • Benjamin A. Olken
  • Anja Sautmann

Abstract

Pre-Analysis Plans (PAPs) for randomized evaluations are becoming increasingly common in Economics, but their definition remains unclear and their practical applications therefore vary widely. Based on our collective experiences as researchers and editors, we articulate a set of principles for the ex-ante scope and ex-post use of PAPs. We argue that the key benefits of a PAP can usually be realized by completing the registration fields in the AEA RCT Registry. Specific cases where more detail may be warranted include when subgroup analysis is expected to be particularly important, or a party to the study has a vested interest. However, a strong norm for more detailed pre-specification can be detrimental to knowledge creation when implementing field experiments in the real world. An ex-post requirement of strict adherence to pre-specified plans, or the discounting of non-pre-specified work, may mean that some experiments do not take place, or that interesting observations and new theories are not explored and reported. Rather, we recommend that the final research paper be written and judged as a distinct object from the “results of the PAP”; to emphasize this distinction, researchers could consider producing a short, publicly available report (the “populated PAP”) that populates the PAP to the extent possible and briefly discusses any barriers to doing so.

Suggested Citation

  • Abhijit Banerjee & Esther Duflo & Amy Finkelstein & Lawrence F. Katz & Benjamin A. Olken & Anja Sautmann, 2020. "In Praise of Moderation: Suggestions for the Scope and Use of Pre-Analysis Plans for RCTs in Economics," NBER Working Papers 26993, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:26993
    Note: DEV LS PE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w26993.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Humphreys, Macartan & Sanchez de la Sierra, Raul & van der Windt, Peter, 2013. "Fishing, Commitment, and Communication: A Proposal for Comprehensive Nonbinding Research Registration," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 1-20, January.
    2. Alexandre Belloni & Victor Chernozhukov & Christian Hansen, 2014. "Inference on Treatment Effects after Selection among High-Dimensional Controlsâ€," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(2), pages 608-650.
    3. Victor Chernozhukov & Mert Demirer & Esther Duflo & Iván Fernández-Val, 2018. "Generic Machine Learning Inference on Heterogeneous Treatment Effects in Randomized Experiments, with an Application to Immunization in India," NBER Working Papers 24678, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Isaiah Andrews & Maximilian Kasy, 2019. "Identification of and Correction for Publication Bias," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(8), pages 2766-2794, August.
    5. Amy Finkelstein & Sarah Taubman & Bill Wright & Mira Bernstein & Jonathan Gruber & Joseph P. Newhouse & Heidi Allen & Katherine Baicker, 2012. "The Oregon Health Insurance Experiment: Evidence from the First Year," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 127(3), pages 1057-1106.
    6. Stefan Wager & Susan Athey, 2018. "Estimation and Inference of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects using Random Forests," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(523), pages 1228-1242, July.
    7. Garret Christensen & Edward Miguel, 2018. "Transparency, Reproducibility, and the Credibility of Economics Research," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 56(3), pages 920-980, September.
    8. Alexandre Belloni & Victor Chernozhukov & Christian Hansen, 2014. "High-Dimensional Methods and Inference on Structural and Treatment Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 28(2), pages 29-50, Spring.
    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. Reca Sarfati & Vod Vilfort, 2025. ""Post" Pre-Analysis Plans: Valid Inference for Non-Preregistered Specifications," Papers 2510.02507, arXiv.org.
    2. Heiler, Phillip, 2024. "Heterogeneous treatment effect bounds under sample selection with an application to the effects of social media on political polarization," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 244(1).
    3. Denis Fougère & Nicolas Jacquemet, 2020. "Policy Evaluation Using Causal Inference Methods," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) hal-03455978, HAL.
    4. Michael C Knaus & Michael Lechner & Anthony Strittmatter, 2021. "Machine learning estimation of heterogeneous causal effects: Empirical Monte Carlo evidence," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 24(1), pages 134-161.
    5. Galiani, Sebastian & Quistorff, Brian, 2024. "Assessing external validity in practice," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(3).
    6. Akash Malhotra, 2021. "A hybrid econometric–machine learning approach for relative importance analysis: prioritizing food policy," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(3), pages 549-581, September.
    7. Denis Fougère & Nicolas Jacquemet, 2019. "Causal Inference and Impact Evaluation," Economie et Statistique / Economics and Statistics, Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques (INSEE), issue 510-511-5, pages 181-200.
    8. Su, Liangjun & Ura, Takuya & Zhang, Yichong, 2019. "Non-separable models with high-dimensional data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 212(2), pages 646-677.
    9. Michael C. Knaus, 2021. "A double machine learning approach to estimate the effects of musical practice on student’s skills," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(1), pages 282-300, January.
    10. Hoeschle, Lisa & Maruejols, Lucie & Yu, Xiaohua, 2025. "The impact of energy justice on local economic outcomes: Evidence from the bioenergy village program in Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    11. Maria Nareklishvili & Nicholas Polson & Vadim Sokolov, 2022. "Feature Selection for Personalized Policy Analysis," Papers 2301.00251, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2023.
    12. Yingheng Zhang & Haojie Li & Gang Ren, 2025. "Data-driven exploration of heterogeneous gasoline price elasticities using generalized random forests," Transportation, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 215-237, February.
    13. Sarah A. Janzen & Jeffrey D. Michler, 2021. "Ulysses' pact or Ulysses' raft: Using pre‐analysis plans in experimental and nonexperimental research," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(4), pages 1286-1304, December.
    14. Kyle Myers & Wei Yang Tham, 2023. "Money, Time, and Grant Design," Papers 2312.06479, arXiv.org.
    15. Geonwoo Kim & Suyong Song, 2024. "Double/Debiased CoCoLASSO of Treatment Effects with Mismeasured High-Dimensional Control Variables," Papers 2408.14671, arXiv.org.
    16. Davide Viviano & Jelena Bradic, 2019. "Synthetic learner: model-free inference on treatments over time," Papers 1904.01490, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    17. Stefano DellaVigna & Elizabeth Linos, 2022. "RCTs to Scale: Comprehensive Evidence From Two Nudge Units," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(1), pages 81-116, January.
    18. Elek, Péter & Bíró, Anikó, 2021. "Regional differences in diabetes across Europe – regression and causal forest analyses," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    19. Montiel Olea, José Luis & Nesbit, James, 2021. "(Machine) learning parameter regions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 222(1), pages 716-744.
    20. Kyle Colangelo & Ying-Ying Lee, 2019. "Double debiased machine learning nonparametric inference with continuous treatments," CeMMAP working papers CWP54/19, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • A0 - General Economics and Teaching - - General

    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:nbr:nberwo:26993. 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://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.