Are Experiments the Only Option? A Look at Dropout Prevention Programs
Open Access
- 1 February 2004
- journal article
- Published by MIT Press in The Review of Economics and Statistics
- Vol. 86 (1) , 180-194
- https://doi.org/10.1162/003465304323023741
Abstract
By comparing experimental and propensity-score impact estimates of dropout prevention programs, we examine whether propensity-score methods produce unbiased estimates of program impacts. We find no consistent evidence that such methods replicate experimental impacts in our setting. This finding holds even when the data available for matching are extensive. Our findings suggest that evaluators who plan to use nonexperimental methods, such as propensity-score matching, need to consider carefully how programs recruit individuals and why individuals enter programs, as unobserved factors may exert powerful influences on outcomes that are not easily captured using nonexperimental methods. © 2004 President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Keywords
All Related Versions
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- Combining Propensity Score Matching with Additional Adjustments for Prognostic CovariatesJournal of the American Statistical Association, 2000
- Causal Effects in Nonexperimental Studies: Reevaluating the Evaluation of Training ProgramsJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1999
- Characterizing the effect of matching using linear propensity score methods with normal distributionsBiometrika, 1992
- The Adequacy of Comparison Group Designs for Evaluations of Employment-Related ProgramsThe Journal of Human Resources, 1987
- The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effectsBiometrika, 1983
- Matching to Remove Bias in Observational StudiesPublished by JSTOR ,1973