IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/uwp/jhriss/v21y1986i4p606-639.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Classical Experiments Needed for Manpower Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Gary Burtless
  • Larry L. Orr

Abstract

The critical element that distinguishes classical experiments from all other modes of analysis is the random assignment of treatment to enrollees in a study. This paper examines the major methodological advantages of random assignment for the purpose of estimating the effectiveness of current manpower policy. It also reviews the claimed methodological and ethical objections to experiments. The main valid objection to an experiment is neither methodological nor ethical, it is the experiment's cost in relation to that of nonexperimental methods of analysis. The authors argue that the offsetting gain from experimentation is the inherent reliability of experimental estimates of treatment effects. The paper offers a simple framework for deciding whether the improved reliability of treatment-effect estimates is worth the added cost of experimentation. It concludes with an assessment of the actual value of experiments for evaluating current manpower policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Gary Burtless & Larry L. Orr, 1986. "Are Classical Experiments Needed for Manpower Policy," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 21(4), pages 606-639.
    • Handle: RePEc:uwp:jhriss:v:21:y:1986:i:4:p:606-639
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/145769
    Download Restriction: A subscripton is required to access pdf files. Pay per article is available.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:uwp:jhriss:v:21:y:1986:i:4:p:606-639. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://jhr.uwpress.org/ .

    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.