Randomized experiments as the bronze standard

In this paper, the strengths and weakneses of randomized field experiments are discussed. Although it seems to be common knowledge that random assignment balances experimental and control groups on all confounders, other features of randomized field experiments are somewhat less appreciated. These i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of experimental criminology Vol. 1; no. 4; pp. 417 - 433
Main Author Berk, Richard A.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Dordrecht Springer Nature B.V 01.12.2005
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1573-3750
1572-8315
DOI10.1007/s11292-005-3538-2

Cover

More Information
Summary:In this paper, the strengths and weakneses of randomized field experiments are discussed. Although it seems to be common knowledge that random assignment balances experimental and control groups on all confounders, other features of randomized field experiments are somewhat less appreciated. These include the role of random assignment in statistical inference and representations of the mechanisms by which the treatment has its impact. Randomized experiments also have important limitations and are subject to the fidelity with which they are implemented. In the end, randomized field experiments are still the best way to estimate causal effects, but are a considerable distance from perfection.[PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]
Bibliography:SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 14
ISSN:1573-3750
1572-8315
DOI:10.1007/s11292-005-3538-2