Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T17:23:56.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - The illusion of learning from observational research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

Alan S. Gerber
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Yale University
Donald P. Green
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Yale University
Edward H. Kaplan
Affiliation:
School of Management, Yale University
Ian Shapiro
Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
Rogers M. Smith
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania
Tarek E. Masoud
Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Empirical studies of cause and effect in social science may be divided into two broad categories, experimental and observational. In the former, individuals or groups are randomly assigned to treatment and control conditions. Most experimental research takes place in a laboratory environment and involves student participants, but several noteworthy studies have been conducted in real-world settings, such as schools (Howell and Peterson 2002), police precincts (Sherman and Rogan 1995), public housing projects (Katz, Kling, and Liebman 2001), and voting wards (Gerber and Green 2000). The experimental category also encompasses research that examines the consequences of randomization performed by administrative agencies, such as the military draft (Angrist 1990), gambling lotteries (Imbens, Rubin, and Sacerdote 2001), random assignment of judges to cases (Berube 2002), and random audits of tax returns (Slemrod, Blumenthal, and Christian 2001). The aim of experimental research is to examine the effects of random variation in one or more independent variables.

Observational research, too, examines the effects of variation in a set of independent variables, but this variation is not generated through randomization procedures. In observational studies, the data generation process by which the independent variables arise is unknown to the researcher. To estimate the parameters that govern cause and effect, the analyst of observational data must make several strong assumptions about the statistical relationship between observed and unobserved causes of the dependent variable (Achen 1986; King, Keohane, and Verba 1994). To the extent that these assumptions are unwarranted, parameter estimates will be biased.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achen, Christopher H. 1986. The Statistical Analysis Of Quasi-Experiments. Berkeley: University of California Press
Angrist, Joshua A. 1990. “Lifetime Earnings and the Vietnam Era Draft Lottery: Evidence from Social Security Administrative Records.” American Economic Review 80(3): 313–36Google Scholar
Angrist, Joshua D., Imbens, Guido W., and Donald, B. Rubin. 1996. “Identification of Casual Effects Using Instrumental Variables.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 91(June): 444–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berube, Danton. 2002. “Random Variations in Federal Sentencing as an Instrumental Variable.” Unpublished ms, Yale University
Box, George E. P. and G. C. Tiao. 1973. Baysian Inference in Statistical Analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
Cook, Thomas D. and Donald T. Campbell. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Cook, Thomas D. and Monique R. Payne. 2002. “Objecting to the Objections to Using Random Assignment in Educational Research,” in Frederick Mosteller and Robert Boruch (eds.), Evidence Matters: Randomized Trials in Education Research. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press
Eldersveld, Samuel J. 1956. “Experimental Propaganda Techniques and Voting Behavior.” American Political Science Review 50 (March): 154–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freund, John E. 1971. Mathematical Statistics, 2nd ed. New York: Prentice-Hall
Gerber, Alan S. and Donald, P. Green. 2000. “The Effects of Canvassing, Direct Mail, and Telephone Contact on Voter Turnout: A Field Experiment.” American Political Science Review 94: 653–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Donald P. and Alan S. Gerber. 2003. “Reclaiming the Experimental Tradition in Political Science,” in The State of the Discipline IIIHelen Milner and Ira Katznelson (eds.), Washington, DC: American Political Science Association
Gosnell, Harold F. 1927. Getting-Out-The-Vote: An Experiment in the Stimulation of Voting. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Heckman, James J. and Jeffrey, A. Smith. 1995. “Assessing the Case for Social Experiments.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 9 (Spring): 85–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howell, William G. and Paul E. Peterson. 2002. The Education Gap: Vouchers and Urban Schools. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press
Imbens, Guido W., Donald, B. Rubin, and Bruce, I. Sacerdote. 2001. “Estimating the Effect of Unearned Income on Labor Earnings, Savings, and Consumption: Evidence from a Survey of Lottery Winners.” American Economic Review 91(4): 778–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, Lawrence F., Jeffrey, R. Kling, and Jeffrey, B. Liebman. 2001. “Moving to Opportunity in Boston: Early Results of a Randomized Mobility Experiment.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 116: 607–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane, and Sidney Verba. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press
Kramer, Gerald H. 1970. “The Effects of Precinct-Level Canvassing on Voting Behavior.” Public Opinion Quarterly 34 (Winter): 560–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitt, Stephen D. 1997. “Using Electoral Cycles in police hiring to Estimate the Effect of Police on Crime.” American Economic Review 87(3): 270–90Google Scholar
McConahay, John B. 1982. “Self-Interest versus Racial Attitudes as Correlates of Anti-Busing Attitudes in Louisville: Is it the Buses or the Blacks?Journal of Politics 44(3): 2–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morton, Rebecca. 2002. “EITM: Experimental Implications of Theoretical Models.” The Political Methodologist 10(2): 14–16Google Scholar
Rosenstone, Steven J. and John Mark Hansen. 1993. Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company
Sherman, Lawrence W. and Dennis, P. Rogan. 1995. “Deterrent Effects of Police Raids on Crack Houses: A Randomized, Controlled Experiment.” Justice Quarterly 12(4): 755–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slemrod, J., Blumenthal, M., and Christian, C.. 2001. “Taxpayer Response to an Increased Probability of Audit: Evidence from a Controlled Experiment in Minnesota.” Journal of Public Economics 79(3): 455–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, Carol H. 2002. “What to Do until the Random Assigner Comes,” in Frederick Mosteller and Robert Boruch (eds.), Evidence Matters: Randomized Trials in Education Research. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×