A Random Shock Is Not Random Assignment

Christoph Engel

No 2016_09, Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods from Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods

Abstract: A random shock excludes reverse causality and reduces omitted variable bias. Yet a natural experiment does not identify random exposure to treatment, but the reaction to a random change from baseline to treatment. A lab experiment comparing higher certainty with higher severity of punishment for stealing (holding the expected value of the intervention constant) shows that the difference between the effects of a random shock and random assignment can be pronounced.

Keywords: identification; random exposure; random shock; natural experiment; certainty and severity of punishment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C01 C12 C90 K14 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016-05
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-exp
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.coll.mpg.de/pdf_dat/2016_09online.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
Journal Article: A random shock is not random assignment (2016)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:mpg:wpaper:2016_09

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods from Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Marc Martin ().