IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ces/ifofor/v19y2018i03p30-35.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Devil’s in the Caveats: A Brief Discussion of the Difficulties of Basic Income Experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Karl Widerquist

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Karl Widerquist, 2018. "The Devil’s in the Caveats: A Brief Discussion of the Difficulties of Basic Income Experiments," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 19(03), pages 30-35, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ifofor:v:19:y:2018:i:03:p:30-35
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/CESifo-Forum-2018-3-widerquist-unconditional-basic-income-september.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deaton, Angus & Cartwright, Nancy, 2018. "Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 2-21.
    2. Widerquist, Karl, 2005. "A failure to communicate: what (if anything) can we learn from the negative income tax experiments?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 49-81, February.
    3. Angus Deaton & Nancy Cartwright, 2016. "Understanding and Misunderstanding Randomized Controlled Trials," Working Papers august_25.pdf, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Research Program in Development Studies..
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jokipalo Veera Amanda, 2019. "Basic Income, Wages, and Productivity: A Laboratory Experiment," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 14(2), pages 1-13, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:ces:ifofor:v:19:y:2018:i:3:p:30-35 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Huber, Martin & Steinmayr, Andreas, 2017. "A Framework for Separating Individual Treatment Effects From Spillover, Interaction, and General Equilibrium Effects," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 21, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    3. Caputo, Vincenzina & Lusk, Jayson L. & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2018. "Choice experiments are not conducted in a vacuum: The effects of external price information on choice behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 335-351.
    4. Gustavo Canavire-Bacarreza & Luis Castro Peñarrieta & Darwin Ugarte Ontiveros, 2021. "Outliers in Semi-Parametric Estimation of Treatment Effects," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-32, April.
    5. Andor, Mark A. & Gerster, Andreas & Peters, Jörg & Schmidt, Christoph M., 2020. "Social Norms and Energy Conservation Beyond the US," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    6. Anthony Yezer & Yishen Liu, 2017. "Can Differences Deceive? The Case of “Foreclosure Externalities"," Working Papers 2017-29, The George Washington University, Institute for International Economic Policy.
    7. Justman, Moshe, 2018. "Randomized controlled trials informing public policy: Lessons from project STAR and class size reduction," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 167-174.
    8. Florent Bédécarrats & Isabelle Guérin & François Roubaud, 2019. "All that Glitters is not Gold. The Political Economy of Randomized Evaluations in Development," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 50(3), pages 735-762, May.
    9. Ashkan Pakseresht & Anna Kristina Edenbrandt & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2021. "Genetically modified food and consumer risk responsibility: The effect of regulatory design and risk type on cognitive information processing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-21, June.
    10. Vellore Arthi & James Fenske, 2018. "Polygamy and child mortality: Historical and modern evidence from Nigeria’s Igbo," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 97-141, March.
    11. Christopher Snowdon, 2018. "Paternalism, Nudging and Liberty," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 88-95, February.
    12. Andreas C Drichoutis & Rodolfo M Nayga, 2020. "Economic Rationality under Cognitive Load," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(632), pages 2382-2409.
    13. Rao, Vijayendra & Ananthpur, Kripa & Malik, Kabir, 2017. "The Anatomy of Failure: An Ethnography of a Randomized Trial to Deepen Democracy in Rural India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 481-497.
    14. Cristina Corduneanu-Huci & Michael T. Dorsch & Paul Maarek, 2017. "Learning to constrain: Political competition and randomized controlled trials in development," THEMA Working Papers 2017-24, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    15. Jörg Peters & Jörg Langbein & Gareth Roberts, 2018. "Generalization in the Tropics – Development Policy, Randomized Controlled Trials, and External Validity," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 33(1), pages 34-64.
    16. Vicky Chemutai & Hubert Escaith, 2017. "Measuring World Trade Organization (WTO) Accession Commitments and their Economic Effects," Journal of International Commerce, Economics and Policy (JICEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(02), pages 1-27, June.
    17. Moshe Justman, 2016. "Economic Research and Education Policy: Project STAR and Class Size Reduction," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2016n37, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    18. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    19. Abhirup Bhunia, 2021. "Evidence-based Policy in India: Crossing the Long, Uphill Bridge," Journal of Development Policy and Practice, , vol. 6(2), pages 137-143, July.
    20. Potash, Eric, 2018. "Randomization bias in field trials to evaluate targeting methods," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 131-135.
    21. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2022. "Game form recognition in preference elicitation, cognitive abilities, and cognitive load," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 49-65.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ces:ifofor:v:19:y:2018:i:03:p:30-35. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifooode.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.