IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v15y1991i4p395-419.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Random Measurement Error Does Not Bias the Treatment Effect Estimate in the Regression-Discontinuity Design

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph C. Cappelleri

    (Cornell University)

  • William M.K. Trochim

    (Cornell University)

  • T.D. Stanley

    (Hendrix College)

  • Charles S. Reichardt

    (Universcty of Denver)

Abstract

A recently published Evaluation Review article (April 1990) claimed that because of random measurement error in the pretest (and the regression toward the mean that results) the estimate of the treatment effect of the regression-discontinuity (RD) design is biased A conceptual approach and a set of computer simulations are presented to arrive at the opposite conclusion: random measurement error in the pretest does not bias the estimate of the treatment effect in the RD design. This article, the first of two dealing with measurement error in the RD design, concentrates specifically on the case of no interaction between pretest and treatment on posttest. The claim that the RD effect estimate is not biased due to measurement error is in full agreement with the conclusion reached by several authors who have examined the design over the last two decades.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph C. Cappelleri & William M.K. Trochim & T.D. Stanley & Charles S. Reichardt, 1991. "Random Measurement Error Does Not Bias the Treatment Effect Estimate in the Regression-Discontinuity Design," Evaluation Review, , vol. 15(4), pages 395-419, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:15:y:1991:i:4:p:395-419
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X9101500401
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X9101500401
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X9101500401?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Griliches, Zvi, 1974. "Errors in Variables and Other Unobservables," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 42(6), pages 971-998, November.
    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. Lee Myoung-Jae, 2017. "Regression Discontinuity with Errors in the Running Variable: Effect on Truthful Margin," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-8, January.
    2. William M.K. Trochim & Joseph C. Cappelleri & Charles S. Reichardt, 1991. "Random Measurement Error Does Not Bias the Treatment Effect Estimate in the Regression-Discontinuity Design," Evaluation Review, , vol. 15(5), pages 571-604, October.
    3. T.D. Stanley, 1991. ""Regression-Discontinuity Design" By Any Other Name Might Be Less Problematic," Evaluation Review, , vol. 15(5), pages 605-624, October.
    4. Charles S. Reichardt & William M.K. Trochim & Joseph C. Cappelleri, 1995. "Reports of the Death of Regression-Discontinuity Analysis are Greatly Exaggerated," Evaluation Review, , vol. 19(1), pages 39-63, February.
    5. Jin-young Choi & Myoung-jae Lee, 2017. "Regression discontinuity: review with extensions," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 1217-1246, December.
    6. Joseph C. Cappelleri & Richard B. Darlington & William M.K. Trochim, 1994. "Power Analysis of Cutoff-Based Randomized Clinical Trials," Evaluation Review, , vol. 18(2), pages 141-152, April.

    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. Shaw, Kathryn L, 1996. "An Empirical Analysis of Risk Aversion and Income Growth," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 14(4), pages 626-653, October.
    2. Bound, John & Schoenbaum, Michael & Stinebrickner, Todd R. & Waidmann, Timothy, 1999. "The dynamic effects of health on the labor force transitions of older workers," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 179-202, June.
    3. Àlexandr Knobel & Ilya Sokolov & Elizaveta Khudko, 2011. "The Impact of State Expenditure on the Quality of General Education in Russia," Research Paper Series, Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy, issue 152P.
    4. Paris, Quirino & Caputo, Michael R., 2004. "Efficient Estimates of a Model of Production and Cost," Working Papers 93742, University of California, Davis, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    5. Bjerkholt,O., 2001. "Tracing Haavelmo's steps from confluence analysis to the probability approach," Memorandum 25/2001, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    6. Eric A. Hanushek, 2004. "Some Simple Analytics of School Quality," NBER Working Papers 10229, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Mohammad Alauddin & Clem Tisdell, 2007. "Factors That Affect Teaching Scores in Economics Instruction: Analysis of Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET) Data," Discussion Papers Series 353, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    8. Saltiel, Fernando, 2020. "Gritting it out: The importance of non-cognitive skills in academic mismatch," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    9. Disney, Richard & Emmerson, Carl & Wakefield, Matthew, 2006. "Ill health and retirement in Britain: A panel data-based analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 621-649, July.
    10. Annacker, Dirk & Hildebrandt, Lutz, 2002. "Unobservable effects in structural models of business performance," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 2002,22, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
    11. Paris, Quirino & Caputo, Michael R., 2004. "A Nonlinear Generalized Additive Error Model of Production and Cost," Working Papers 93743, University of California, Davis, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    12. Böhme, Marcus & Thiele, Rainer, 2012. "Is the Informal Sector Constrained from the Demand Side? Evidence for Six West African Capitals," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(7), pages 1369-1381.
    13. Alston, Julian M. & Pardey, Philip G., 2001. "Attribution and other problems in assessing the returns to agricultural R&D," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 25(2-3), pages 141-152, September.
    14. Michela Nardo, 2003. "The Quantification of Qualitative Survey Data: A Critical Assessment," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(5), pages 645-668, December.
    15. Mohammad Alauddin & Temesgen Kifle, 2014. "Does the student evaluation of teaching instrument really measure instructorsù teaching effectiveness? An econometric analysis of studentsù perceptions in economics courses," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 156-168.
    16. Bound, John & Krueger, Alan B, 1991. "The Extent of Measurement Error in Longitudinal Earnings Data: Do Two Wrongs Make a Right?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, January.
    17. Mark N. Harris & Xueyan Zhao & Eugenio Zucchelli, 2021. "Ageing Workforces, Ill‐health and Multi‐state Labour Market Transitions," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 83(1), pages 199-227, February.
    18. Nigel Rice & Jennifer Roberts & Andrew M. Jones, 2006. "Sick of work or too sick to work? Evidence on health shocks and early retirement from the BHPS," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 06/13, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    19. Berndt, Ernst R. & Morrison, Catherine J., 1995. "High-tech capital formation and economic performance in U.S. manufacturing industries An exploratory analysis," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 9-43, January.
    20. Esteban-Bravo, Mercedes & Vidal-Sanz, Jose M., 2007. "Worst-case estimation for econometric models with unobservable components," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(7), pages 3330-3354, April.

    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:sae:evarev:v:15:y:1991:i:4:p:395-419. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.