Journal
REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS
Volume 86, Issue 1, Pages 156-179Publisher
M I T PRESS
DOI: 10.1162/003465304323023732
Keywords
-
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
This paper assesses nonexperimental estimators using results from a six-state random assignment study of mandatory welfare-to-work programs. The assessment addresses two questions: which nonexperimental methods provide the most accurate estimates; and do the best methods work well enough to replace random assignment? Three tentative conclusions emerge. Nonexperimental bias was larger in the medium run than in the short run. In-state comparison groups produced less average bias than out-of-state comparison groups. Statistical adjustments did not consistently reduce bias, although some methods reduced the estimated bias in some circumstances and propensity-score methods provided a specification check that eliminated some large biases.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available