IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2405.06779.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Generalization Issues in Experiments Involving Multidimensional Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Jiawei Fu
  • Xiaojun Li

Abstract

Can the causal effects estimated in an experiment be generalized to real-world scenarios? This question lies at the heart of social science studies. External validity primarily assesses whether experimental effects persist across different settings, implicitly presuming the consistency of experimental effects with their real-life counterparts. However, we argue that this presumed consistency may not always hold, especially in experiments involving multi-dimensional decision processes, such as conjoint experiments. We introduce a formal model to elucidate how attention and salience effects lead to three types of inconsistencies between experimental findings and real-world phenomena: amplified effect magnitude, effect sign reversal, and effect importance reversal. We derive testable hypotheses from each theoretical outcome and test these hypotheses using data from various existing conjoint experiments and our own experiments. Drawing on our theoretical framework, we propose several recommendations for experimental design aimed at enhancing the generalizability of survey experiment findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiawei Fu & Xiaojun Li, 2024. "Generalization Issues in Experiments Involving Multidimensional Decisions," Papers 2405.06779, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2024.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2405.06779
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2405.06779
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barabas, Jason & Jerit, Jennifer, 2010. "Are Survey Experiments Externally Valid?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(2), pages 226-242, May.
    2. Bueno De Mesquita, Ethan & Tyson, Scott A., 2020. "The Commensurability Problem: Conceptual Difficulties in Estimating the Effect of Behavior on Behavior," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 114(2), pages 375-391, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Lergetporer, Philipp & Schwerdt, Guido & Werner, Katharina & West, Martin R. & Woessmann, Ludger, 2018. "How information affects support for education spending: Evidence from survey experiments in Germany and the United States," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 138-157.
    2. Hicken, Allen & Leider, Stephen & Ravanilla, Nico & Yang, Dean, 2018. "Temptation in vote-selling: Evidence from a field experiment in the Philippines," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 1-14.
    3. repec:gig:joupla:v:7:y:2015:i:1:p:45-81 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Lergetporer, Philipp & Piopiunik, Marc & Simon, Lisa, 2021. "Does the education level of refugees affect natives’ attitudes?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    5. Izzo, Federica & Dewan, Torun & Wolton, Stephane, 2022. "Cumulative knowledge in the social sciences: The case of improving voters' information," MPRA Paper 112559, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. David A. Steinberg & Yeling Tan, 2023. "Public responses to foreign protectionism: Evidence from the US-China trade war," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 145-167, January.
    7. Luca Bellodi & Massimo Morelli & Matia Vannoni, 2021. "A Costly Commitment: Populism, Government Performance, and the Quality of Bureaucracy," CESifo Working Paper Series 9470, CESifo.
    8. David H. Bearce & Thomas R. Cook, 2018. "The first image reversed: IGO signals and mass political attitudes," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 595-619, December.
    9. Philipp Lergetporer & Guido Schwerdt & Katharina Werner & Ludger Woessmann, 2016. "Information and Preferences for Public Spending: Evidence from Representative Survey Experiments," CESifo Working Paper Series 5938, CESifo.
    10. Kuehnhanss, Colin R. & Heyndels, Bruno, 2018. "All’s fair in taxation: A framing experiment with local politicians," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 26-40.
    11. Bratton, Michael, 2013. "Measuring Government Performance in Public Opinion Surveys in Africa: Towards Experiments?," WIDER Working Paper Series 023, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    12. Angino, Siria & Secola, Stefania, 2022. "Instinctive versus reflective trust in the European Central Bank," Working Paper Series 2660, European Central Bank.
    13. Grewenig, Elisabeth & Lergetporer, Philipp & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger, 2020. "Do party positions affect the public's policy preferences? Experimental evidence on support for family policies," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 523-543.
    14. Brilé Anderson & Thomas Bernauer & Stefano Balietti, 2017. "Effects of fairness principles on willingness to pay for climate change mitigation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 142(3), pages 447-461, June.
    15. Busemeyer, Marius R. & Lergetporer, Philipp & Woessmann, Ludger, 2018. "Public opinion and the political economy of educational reforms: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 161-185.
    16. Cascavilla, Alessandro, 2022. "Does climate change concern alter tax morale preferences? Evidence from an Italian survey," MPRA Paper 113039, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Lala Muradova & Ross James Gildea, 2021. "Oil wealth and US public support for war," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(1), pages 3-19, January.
    18. Caspersen, Joakim & Paulsen, Veronika, 2023. "Discretionary decision making in child welfare – An experimental vignette study of the use of interpreter services," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    19. Milosh, Maria & Painter, Marcus & Sonin, Konstantin & Van Dijcke, David & Wright, Austin L., 2021. "Unmasking partisanship: Polarization undermines public response to collective risk," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    20. Miquel Pellicer & Patrizio Piraino & Eva Wegner, 2014. "Information, mobilization, and demand for redistribution: A survey experiment in South Africa," SALDRU Working Papers 139, Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, University of Cape Town.
    21. Kevin L. Cope, 2023. "Measuring law's normative force," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 1005-1044, December.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2405.06779. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.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.