What is it about?
Governments and organizations worldwide have established behavioral insights teams advocating for randomized experiments as a critical tool to advancing human welfare. Recently, however, it has been suggested that people tend to find randomized experiments as less appropriate than the universal implementation of its underlying unobjectionable policies, while others have argued that such a common pattern does not exist. The goal of our research was to examine the existing evidence for such a common pattern of experiment aversion to determine its generalizability. In a nutshell, we find that experiment aversion does not appear to generalize, and therefore policymakers may not need to be concerned about using evidence-based practice more so than about universally implementing individual policies.
Featured Image
Photo by Ryoji Iwata on Unsplash
Why is it important?
As previous authors have pointed out, individuals’ attitudes toward experiments matter not because these individuals decide on policy implementation, but because they affect policymakers’ decisions. Therefore, if policymakers anticipate a tendency for objections toward experiments, they may opt for universal implementations or conduct randomized evaluations in secrecy – neither of which is optimal.
Perspectives
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Experiment aversion does not appear to generalize, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, April 2023, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2217551120.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page