logoPicV1 logoTextV1

Search Results


Below results based on the criteria 'field experiments'
Total number of records returned: 7

1
Paper
The importance of statistical methodology for analyzing data from field experimentation: Evaluating voter mobilization strategies
Imai, Kosuke

Uploaded 07-08-2002
Keywords field experiments
causal inference
instrumental variables
Abstract We introduce a set of new Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms for Bayesian analysis of the multinomial probit model. Our Bayesian representation of the model places a new, and possibly improper, prior distribution directly on the identifiable parameters and thus is relatively easy to interpret and use. Our algorithms, which are based on the method of marginal data augmentation, involve only draws from standard distributions and dominate other available Bayesian methods in that they are as quick to converge as the fastest methods but with a more attractive prior specification.

2
Paper
Attributing Effects to A Cluster Randomized Get-Out-The-Vote Campaign: An Application of Randomization Inference Using Full Matching
Bowers, Jake
Hansen, Ben

Uploaded 07-18-2005
Keywords causal inference
randomization inference
attributable effects
full matching
instrumental variables
missing data
field experiments
clustering
Abstract Statistical analysis requires a probability model: commonly, a model for the dependence of outcomes $Y$ on confounders $X$ and a potentially causal variable $Z$. When the goal of the analysis is to infer $Z$'s effects on $Y$, this requirement introduces an element of circularity: in order to decide how $Z$ affects $Y$, the analyst first determines, speculatively, the manner of $Y$'s dependence on $Z$ and other variables. This paper takes a statistical perspective that avoids such circles, permitting analysis of $Z$'s effects on $Y$ even as the statistician remains entirely agnostic about the conditional distribution of $Y$ given $X$ and $Z$, or perhaps even denies that such a distribution exists. Our assumptions instead pertain to the conditional distribution $Z vert X$, and the role of speculation in settling them is reduced by the existence of random assignment of $Z$ in a field experiment as well as by poststratification, testing for overt bias before accepting a poststratification, and optimal full matching. Such beginnings pave the way for ``randomization inference'', an approach which, despite a long history in the analysis of designed experiments, is relatively new to political science and to other fields in which experimental data are rarely available. The approach applies to both experiments and observational studies. We illustrate this by applying it to analyze A. Gerber and D. Green's New Haven Vote 98 campaign. Conceived as both a get-out-the-vote campaign and a field experiment in political participation, the study assigned households to treatment and desired to estimate the effect of treatment on the individuals nested within the households. We estimate the number of voters who would not have voted had the campaign not prompted them to --- that is, the total number of votes attributable to the interventions of the campaigners --- while taking into account the non-independence of observations within households, non-random compliance, and missing responses. Both our statistical inferences about these attributable effects and the stratification and matching that precede them rely on quite recent developments from statistics; our matching, in particular, has novel features of potentially wide applicability. Our broad findings resemble those of the original analysis by citet{gerbergreen00}.

3
Paper
The Essential Role of Pair Matching in Cluster-Randomized Experiments, with Application to the Mexican Universal Health Insurance Evaluation
Imai, Kosuke
King, Gary
Nall, Clayton

Uploaded 07-17-2007
Keywords causal inference
community intervention trials
field experiments
group-randomized trials
health policy
matched-pair design
noncompliance
Abstract A basic feature of many field experiments is that investigators are only able to randomize clusters of individuals -- such as households, communities, firms, medical practices, schools, or classrooms -- even when the individual is the unit of interest. To recoup some of the resulting efficiency loss, many studies pair similar clusters and randomize treatment within pairs. Other studies (including almost all published political science field experiments) avoid pairing, in part because some prominent methodological articles claim to have identified serious problems with this 'matched-pair cluster-randomized' design. We prove that all such claims about problems with this design are unfounded. We then show that the estimator for matched-pair designs favored in the literature is appropriate only in situations where matching is not needed. To address this problem without modeling assumptions, we generalize Neyman's (1923) approach and propose a simple new estimator with much improved statistical properties. We also introduce methods to cope with individual-level noncompliance, which most existing approaches incorrectly assume away. We show that from the perspective of, among other things, bias, efficiency, or power, pairing should be used in cluster-randomized experiments whenever feasible; failing to do so is equivalent to discarding a considerable fraction of one's data. We develop these techniques in the context of a randomized evaluation we are conducting of the Mexican Universal Health Insurance Program.

4
Paper
Misunderstandings among Experimentalists and Observationalists about Causal Inference
Imai, Kosuke
King, Gary
Stuart, Elizabeth

Uploaded 09-16-2007
Keywords matching
blocking
causal inference
experimental design
observational studies
average treatment effects
covariate balance
field experiments
survey experiments
Abstract We attempt to clarify, and suggest how to avoid, several serious misunderstandings about and fallacies of causal inference in experimental and observational research. These issues concern some of the most basic advantages and disadvantages of each basic research design. Problems include improper use of hypothesis tests for covariate balance between the treated and control groups, and the consequences of using randomization, blocking before randomization, and matching after treatment assignment to achieve covariate balance. Applied researchers in a wide range of scientific disciplines seem to fall prey to one or more of these fallacies, and as a result make suboptimal design or analysis choices. To clarify these points, we derive a new four-part decomposition of the key estimation errors in making causal inferences. We then show how this decomposition can help scholars from different experimental and observational research traditions better understand each other's inferential problems and attempted solutions. (This paper is forthcoming in the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, but we have some time for revisions and would value any comments anyone might have. This is a revised and much more general version of an earlier paper, "The Balance Test Fallacy in Causal Inference".)

5
Paper
Definition and Diagnosis of Problematic Attrition in Randomized Controlled Experiments
Martel García, Fernando

Uploaded 04-25-2013
Keywords attrition
randomized controlled experiments
field experiments
causal diagrams
directed acyclic graphs
average treatment effect
nonparametric
Abstract Attrition is the Achilles' Heel of the randomized experiment: It is fairly common, and it can completely unravel the benefits of randomization. Using the structural language of causal diagrams I demonstrate that attrition is problematic for identification of the average treatment effect (ATE) if -- and only if -- it is a common effect of the treatment and the outcome (or a cause of the outcome other than the treatment). I also demonstrate that whether the ATE is identified and estimable for the full population of units in the experiment, or only for those units with observed outcomes, depends on two d-separation conditions. One of these is testable ex-post under standard experimental assumptions. The other is testable ex-ante so long as adequate measurement protocols are adopted. Missing at Random (MAR) assumptions are neither necessary nor sufficient for identification of the ATE.

6
Paper
Unresponsive, Unpersuaded: The Unintended Consequences of Voter Persuasion Efforts
Bailey, Michael
Hopkins, Daniel
Rogers, Todd

Uploaded 08-09-2013
Keywords causal inference
field experiments
persuasion
attrition
multiple imputation
Approximate Bayesian Bootstrap
Abstract Can randomized experiments at the individual level help assess the persuasive effects of campaign tactics? In the contemporary U.S., vote choice is not observable, so one promising research design to assess persuasion involves randomizing appeals and then using a survey to measure vote intentions. Here, we analyze one such field experiment conducted during the 2008 presidential election in which 56,000 registered voters were assigned to persuasion in person, by phone, and/or by mail. Persuasive appeals by canvassers had two unintended consequences. First, they reduced responsiveness to the follow-up survey, lowering the response rate sharply among infrequent voters. Second, various statistical methods to address the resulting biases converge on a counter-intuitive conclusion: the persuasive canvassing reduced candidate support. Our results allow us to rule out even small effects in the intended direction, and illustrate the backlash that persuasion can engender.

7
Paper
Voter Persuasion in Compulsory Electorates: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Australia
Lam, Patrick
Peyton, Kyle

Uploaded 12-14-2013
Keywords voter persuasion
field experiments
causal inference
missing data
Abstract Most of the literature on grassroots campaigning focuses on mobilizing potential sup- porters to turn out to vote. The actual ability of partisan campaigns to boost support by changing voter preferences is unclear. We present the results of a field experiment the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) ran during the 2013 Australian Federal Election. The experiments were designed to minimize the conservative (the Coalition) vote as part of one of the largest and most extensively documented voter persuasion campaigns in Australian history. Union members who were identified as undecided voters in over 30 electorates were targeted with appeals by direct mail and phone banks. Because of the presence of compulsory voting in Australia, we are able to identify the effects of voter persuasion independently of voter turnout. We find that direct mail, the most extensively used campaign strategy in Australia, has little effect of voter persuasion. Direct human contact, on the other hand, seems to be an effective tool for voter persuasion. Among undecided voters who actually receive direct contact via phone call, we find a ten percentage point decrease in the Coalition vote. From a methodological standpoint, we use various methods to account for multiple treatment arms, measured treatment noncompliance in one of the treatments, and missing outcome and covariate data. The field experiment also provides a good lesson in conducting and saving broken experiments in the presence of planning uncertainty and implementation failures.


< prev 1 next>
   
wustlArtSci