In Pursuit of Balance: Randomization in Practice in Development Field Experiments
Miriam Bruhn () and
David McKenzie ()
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 2009, vol. 1, issue 4, 200-232
We present new evidence on the randomization methods used in existing experiments, and new simulations comparing these methods. We find that many papers do not describe the randomization in detail, implying that better reporting is needed. Our simulations suggest that in samples of 300 or more, the different methods perform similarly. However, for very persistent outcome variables, and in smaller samples, pair-wise matching and stratification perform best and appear to dominate the rerandomization methods commonly used in practice. The simulations also point to specific recommendations for which variables to balance on, and for which controls to include in the ex post analysis. (JEL C83, C93, O12)
JEL-codes: C83 C93 O12 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Note: DOI: 10.1257/app.1.4.200
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (170) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.
Working Paper: In pursuit of balance: randomization in practice in development field experiments (2008)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aea:aejapp:v:1:y:2009:i:4:p:200-232
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
Access Statistics for this article
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics is currently edited by Alexandre Mas
More articles in American Economic Journal: Applied Economics from American Economic Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Michael P. Albert ().