Syndicate content

Recent comments

  • Reply to: Is your education program benefiting the most vulnerable students?   9 hours 44 min ago
    Breaking Down the Bar Graph.

    Dear Dave and Fei,
    Thought-provoking post!

    I wanted to follow up on the bar graph at the end.  In case anyone is looking further into whether studies show treatment effects on these subpopulations, I thought there were a few points worth exploring.

    One is the likelihood of reporting such heterogenous effect estimates (in relation to gender, SES, learning levels) conditional on doing any heterogeneity analysis at all.  After all, some journals or papers are pretty tightly space-constrained.  (Though not in the online appendix!)

    Another is whether the likelihood of reporting such effects is in any way predicted by the statistical power in the main effects: when you split your sample, estimation becomes less precise, but this is less of an issue when you start with high precision in the first place.

    Yet another is that for the SES and baseline learning levels, it would be interesting to ask how many of the studies that didn't report such heterogeneous effects couldn't do so because they didn't collect the data (so this is a call to collect more data when possilbe, but it has a potentially substantial cost), or simply don't report doing so (lower-hanging fruit, then, to re-analyze the data now).

    In any event, thank you for your post!
  • Reply to: The State of Development Journals 2017: Quality, Acceptance Rates, and Review Times   4 days 10 hours ago

    Great piece of Information. I have experienced the rate of acceptance for the paper related to international finance is less.

  • Reply to: Do impact evaluations tell us anything about reducing poverty? Vol. II: The empire stagnates   5 days 13 hours ago
    Thanks for this Silvio.   The overlap will be minimal -- most of ours are from 2017-8, with just a few from 2016.  

    Often I've heard people shy away from consumption/expenditure because it's noisy -- but I agree, it would be good to know if they considered it.  And at the very least, are they working with poor people.  
  • Reply to: Do impact evaluations tell us anything about reducing poverty? Vol. II: The empire stagnates   5 days 14 hours ago

    Thanks Marcus for this relevant post. It would be interesting to see the list of studies that you have reviewed. We have found similar results when we conducted a literature review of impact evaluations of combined agricultural and social protection interventions ( table 6 pag 47). Out of 37 studies, in only 5 of them (14%) authors analyzed some measures of monetary poverty. We completed the lit rev by the end of 2016, so it would be interesting to compare how many impact evaluations appear in our and your review. Why authors did not have a closer look at poverty? Did they look at it and did not report the impact estimate because it was not statistically significant or it did not have the expected sign/magnitude? Sometimes we might expect reductions in the poverty gap instead of the head count ratio, but in any case we should try to be as much transparent as possible and at least justify why we did not look at any of these indicators.

  • Reply to: Electronic versus paper-based data collection: reviewing the debate   6 days 15 hours ago

    I really enjoyed the content of this blog regarding CAPI or PAPI. One question I have is ..apart from the 7 practical points you have mentioned,is there any theoretical foundations or fame work which can depict or clarify why CAPI generate better data quality compared to PAPI?