IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/xwju8.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A comment on randomization checks in economics experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Gruener, Sven

Abstract

This note deals with baseline comparisons in randomized controlled trials in economics. Although widely spread in the literature, resorting to p-values is an inadequate procedure to assess whether randomization was successfully carried out. Instead, it is promising to use standardized differences. In addition, challenges to evaluate the quality of randomization appear if self-selection is systematically different across the com-pared treatments.

Suggested Citation

  • Gruener, Sven, 2018. "A comment on randomization checks in economics experiments," SocArXiv xwju8, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:xwju8
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/xwju8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5b6be5c00f2e80001a60c5b1/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/xwju8?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Catherine C. Eckel & Philip J. Grossman, 2000. "Volunteers and Pseudo-Volunteers: The Effect of Recruitment Method in Dictator Experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 3(2), pages 107-120, October.
    2. Dunning,Thad, 2012. "Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107017665, November.
    3. Deaton, Angus & Cartwright, Nancy, 2018. "Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 2-21.
    4. Dunning,Thad, 2012. "Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107698000, November.
    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. James Mahoney & Andrew Owen, 2022. "Importing set-theoretic tools into quantitative research: the case of necessary and sufficient conditions," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 2001-2022, August.
    2. Haoge Chang & Joel Middleton & P. M. Aronow, 2021. "Exact Bias Correction for Linear Adjustment of Randomized Controlled Trials," Papers 2110.08425, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2021.
    3. Sven Grüner & Norbert Hirschauer & Felix Krüger, 2023. "Eliciting individual risk attitudes - different procedures, different findings," International Journal of Information and Decision Sciences, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 15(3), pages 221-242.
    4. Grüner Sven, 2020. "Sample Size Calculation in Economic Experiments," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 240(6), pages 791-823, December.
    5. Paolo Pinotti, 0. "The Credibility Revolution in the Empirical Analysis of Crime," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 0, pages 1-14.
    6. Oded Galor & Omer Ozak, 2014. "The Agricultural Origins of Time Preference," Working Papers 2014-5, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    7. Catherine Welch & Eriikka Paavilainen-Mäntymäki & Rebecca Piekkari & Emmanuella Plakoyiannaki, 2022. "Reconciling theory and context: How the case study can set a new agenda for international business research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(1), pages 4-26, February.
    8. Gregory J. Wawro & Ira Katznelson, 2020. "American political development and new challenges of causal inference," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 185(3), pages 299-314, December.
    9. de Renzio, Paolo & Wehner, Joachim, 2017. "The impacts of fiscal openness," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 82521, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Arzi Adbi, 2023. "Financial Sustainability of For-Profit Versus Non-Profit Microfinance Organizations Following a Scandal," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 188(1), pages 57-74, November.
    11. Adel Daoud, 2020. "The wealth of nations and the health of populations: A quasi-experimental design of the impact of sovereign debt crises on child mortality," Papers 2012.14941, arXiv.org.
    12. John Gerring & Lee Cojocaru, 2016. "Selecting Cases for Intensive Analysis," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 45(3), pages 392-423, August.
    13. Kendall D. Funk & Erica Owen, 2020. "Consequences of an Anti‐Corruption Experiment for Local Government Performance in Brazil," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(2), pages 444-468, March.
    14. Oded Galor & Ömer Özak, 2016. "The Agricultural Origins of Time Preference," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(10), pages 3064-3103, October.
    15. Natália S. Bueno & Thad Dunning, 2016. "Race, resources, and representation: Evidence from Brazilian politicians," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2016-144, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    16. Isabel J. Raabe & Alexander Ehlert & David Johann & Heiko Rauhut, 2020. "Satisfaction of scientists during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-7, December.
    17. Yiannis Georgiou & Eleni A. Kyza, 2023. "Fostering Chemistry Students’ Scientific Literacy for Responsible Citizenship through Socio-Scientific Inquiry-Based Learning (SSIBL)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-21, April.
    18. Claudia Schütze & Catherine Cleophas & Monideepa Tarafdar, 2020. "Revenue management systems as symbiotic analytics systems: insights from a field study," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(3), pages 1007-1031, November.
    19. Shige Song & Weidong Wang, 2019. "Testing the Only-Child Advantage in Cognitive Development in the Context of China’s One-Child Policy," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 38(6), pages 841-867, December.
    20. Scott Gates & Mogens K. Justesen, 2020. "Political Trust, Shocks, and Accountability: Quasi-experimental Evidence from a Rebel Attack," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 64(9), pages 1693-1723, October.

    More about this item

    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:osf:socarx:xwju8. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.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.