Justifying the use of non-experimental methods and disqualifying the use of randomized controlled trials: challenging folklore in evaluation research in crime and justice |
| |
Authors: | David Weisburd |
| |
Institution: | (1) Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel;(2) George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA |
| |
Abstract: | The key limitation of non-experimental evaluation methods is that they require an assumption that all confounding factors
related to treatment are identified in the statistical models developed. The key advantage of randomized experiments is that
this assumption can be relaxed. In this paper, I describe and explain why this assumption is so critical for non-experiments
and why it can be ignored in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). I also challenge what I describe as “folklores” that are
used to justify the use of non-randomized studies despite this statistical limitation, and to justify the failure of evaluation
researchers in crime and justice to use randomized experiments despite their unique ability to overcome this limitation. I
conclude by reinforcing what Joan McCord had argued after a life time of review of evaluations: “(W)henever possible” evaluation
studies “should employ random assignment.” |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|