How Within-Study Comparisons can Inform Research and Evaluation Design for the Third Sector-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

How Within-Study Comparisons can Inform Research and Evaluation Design for the Third Sector

Published:2022-02-25 Issue:6 Volume:33 Page:1235-1244
ISSN:0957-8765
Container-title:VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations
language:en
Short-container-title:Voluntas

Author:

Anderson Kaitlin P.^ORCID,Wolf Patrick J.

Abstract

AbstractWithin-study comparisons (WSCs) compare quasi-experimental results to an experimental benchmark and assess the extent to which quasi-experiments (QEs) sacrifice internal validity for external validity. WSCs inform decisions about when to use experiments or QEs, as well as methodological decisions (e.g., covariate selection) about how to implement QEs when they are necessary or preferred. We review the methodological literature on WSCs and present the findings from a WSC of a school voucher program as an example of the use of WSCs to inform policy debates involving the third sector. Prior literature and our results suggest that QE evaluations of third-sector institutions can produce low levels of bias, but only if analytic models include key proxy variables for voluntary self-selection into programs.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Strategy and Management,Public Administration,Sociology and Political Science,Business and International Management

Link

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11266-022-00464-9.pdf

Reference69 articles.

1. Abadie, A., & Imbens, G. W. (2008). On the failure of the bootstrap for matching estimators. Econometrica, 76, 1537–1557.

2. Abdulkadiroglu, A., Angrist, J., Cohodes, S., Dynarksi, S., Fullerton, J., Kane, T., & Pathak, P. (2009). Informing the debate: Comparing Boston’s charter, pilot, and traditional schools. The Boston Foundation.

3. Abdulkadiroğlu, A., Pathak, P. A., & Walters, C. R. (2018). Free to choose: Can school choice reduce student achievement? American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 10(1), 175–206.

4. Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., Schwalm, D. E., Carroll, J., & Hsuing, S. (1998). Comparison of a randomized and two quasi-experimental designs in a single outcome evaluation: Efficacy of a university-level remedial writing program. Evaluation Review, 22, 207–244.

5. Anderson, K. P., & Wolf, P. J. (2019). Does method matter? Assessing the correspondence between experimental and nonexperimental results from a school voucher program evaluation. EDRE Working Paper No. 2017-10. Available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2952967.