The Case for Randomised Trials (and Why Big Data Does Not Supersede Randomisation)

Andrew Leigh

Australian Economic Review, 2025, vol. 58, issue 3, 251-258

Abstract: Research Question/Issue With the growing availability of large‐scale datasets, is randomisation still necessary for identifying causal impacts? Research Findings/Insights Randomised trials, by using luck to assign participants to treatment and control groups, reliably provide a credible counterfactual that ensures observed differences reflect causal impacts. In contrast, observational data often produces misleading correlations that fail to replicate under experimental conditions. Therefore, the increased availability of big data does not make randomisation obsolete. Practitioner/Policy Implications I propose five approaches to increase the quality and quantity of randomised policy trials: encourage curiosity in yourself and those you lead; seek simple trials, especially at the outset; ensure experiments are ethically grounded; foster institutions that push people towards more rigorous evaluation; and collaborate internationally to share best practice and identify evidence gaps. Methods Used This paper employs a qualitative synthesis of historical and contemporary examples, illustrating the superiority of randomised trials over purely observational methods. By drawing comparisons across disciplines—economics, health, and social policy—it highlights how nonexperimental approaches can fall short and explores how big data can be a complement to rigorous randomised trials.

Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8462.70003

Related works:
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:bla:ausecr:v:58:y:2025:i:3:p:251-258

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://ordering.onl ... 7-8462&ref=1467-8462

Access Statistics for this article

Australian Economic Review is currently edited by John de New, Viet Hoang Nguyen and Susan Méndez

More articles in Australian Economic Review from The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().