Education Choices in Mexico: Using a Structural Model and a Randomized Experiment to Evaluate PROGRESA

Attanasio, Orazio; Meghir, Costas; Santiago, Ana

doi:10.1093/restud/rdr015

Cited by 281 publications

(239 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

231

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(Early examples include Moffitt (1979) on labor supply and Wise (1985) on housing; a more recent example is Heckman et al (2013) for the Perry pre-school program. Development economics examples include Attanasio et al (2012), Attanasio et al (2015), Todd and Wolpin (2006), Wolpin (2013), and Duflo et al (2012).) These structural models sometimes require formidable auxiliary assumptions on functional forms or the distributions of unobservables, but they have compensating advantages, including the ability to integrate theory and evidence, to make out-of-sample predictions, and to analyze welfare, and the use of RCT evidence allows the relaxation of at least some of the assumptions that are needed for identification.…”

Section: Section 2: Using the Results Of Randomized Controlled Trialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials

Deaton

Cartwright

2018

Social Science & Medicine

1,239

879

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are increasingly popular in the social sciences, not only in medicine. We argue that the lay public, and sometimes researchers, put too much trust in RCTs over other methods of investigation. Contrary to frequent claims in the applied literature, randomization does not equalize everything other than the treatment in the treatment and control groups, it does not automatically deliver a precise estimate of the average treatment effect (ATE), and it does not relieve us of the need to think about (observed or unobserved) covariates. Finding out whether an estimate was generated by chance is more difficult than commonly believed. At best, an RCT yields an unbiased estimate, but this property is of limited practical value. Even then, estimates apply only to the sample selected for the trial, often no more than a convenience sample, and justification is required to extend the results to other groups, including any population to which the trial sample belongs, or to any individual, including an individual in the trial. Demanding ‘external validity’ is unhelpful because it expects too much of an RCT while undervaluing its potential contribution. RCTs do indeed require minimal assumptions and can operate with little prior knowledge. This is an advantage when persuading distrustful audiences, but it is a disadvantage for cumulative scientific progress, where prior knowledge should be built upon, not discarded. RCTs can play a role in building scientific knowledge and useful predictions but they can only do so as part of a cumulative program, combining with other methods, including conceptual and theoretical development, to discover not ‘what works’, but ‘why things work’.

show abstract

Section: Section 2: Using the Results Of Randomized Controlled Trialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials

Deaton

Cartwright

2018

Social Science & Medicine

1,239

879

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Attanasio et al (2005) and Todd & Wolpin (2006) use the experimental data generated by the PROGRESA experiment to test structural models of parental decisions about schooling and fertility and make out-of-sample predictions using their models to compare the existing PROGRESA subsidy schedule with several alternatives that were not experimented with in the actual program. They argue that eliminating the subsidy in lower grades, where attendance is almost universal, and increasing it in upper grades would leave overall program costs unchanged but increase average completed schooling.…”

Section: Helping More Children Go To Schoolmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Education in the Developing World: What Have We Learned from Randomized Evaluations?

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Across a range of contexts, reductions in education costs and provision of subsidies can boost school participation, often dramatically. Decisions to attend school seem subject to peer effects and time-inconsistent preferences. Merit scholarships, school health programs, and information about returns to education can all cost-effectively spur school participation. However, distortions in education systems, such as weak teacher incentives and elite-oriented curricula, undermine learning in school and much of the impact of increasing existing educational spending. Pedagogical innovations designed to address these distortions (such as technology-assisted instruction, remedial education, and tracking by achievement) can raise test scores at a low cost. Merely informing parents about school conditions seems insufficient to improve teacher incentives, and evidence on merit pay is mixed, but hiring teachers locally on short-term contracts can save money and improve educational outcomes. School vouchers can cost-effectively increase both school participation and learning.

show abstract

“…Similar to contingency management (CM) programs developed by psychologists for treating individual-level substance use problems, CEIs operate as policy and structural-level interventions by providing financial rewards to individuals who engage in behaviors that facilitate positive health outcomes - such as school attendance, clinic visits, and proper nutrition. Community-level effects of CEI programs on child and family health have been observed in many parts of the world (Attanasio, Meghir, & Santiago, 2011). Providing economic incentives to individuals for changing sexual risk behaviors associated with HIV transmission presents a compelling extension of this framework.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditional economic incentives for reducing HIV risk behaviors: Integration of psychology and behavioral economics.

Operario¹,

Kuo²,

Sosa-Rubí³

et al. 2013

Health Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective This paper reviews psychology and behavioral economic approaches to HIV prevention, and examines the integration and application of these approaches in conditional economic incentive (CEI) programs for reducing HIV risk behavior. Methods We discuss the history of HIV prevention approaches, highlighting the important insights and limitations of psychological theories. We provide an overview of the theoretical tenets of behavioral economics that are relevant to HIV prevention, and utilize CEIs as an illustrative example of how traditional psychological theories end behavioral economics can be combined into new approaches for HIV prevention. Results Behavioral economic interventions can complement psychological frameworks for reducing HIV risk by introducing unique theoretical understandings about the conditions under which risky decisions are amenable to intervention. Findings from illustrative CEI programs show mixed but generally promising effects of economic interventions on HIV and STI prevalence, HIV testing, HIV medication adherence, and drug use. Conclusion CEI programs can complement psychological interventions for HIV prevention and behavioral risk reduction. To maximize program effectiveness, CEI programs must be designed according to contextual and population-specific factors that may determine intervention applicability and success.

show abstract

Education Choices in Mexico: Using a Structural Model and a Randomized Experiment to Evaluate PROGRESA

Cited by 281 publications

References 17 publications

Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials

Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials

Improving Education in the Developing World: What Have We Learned from Randomized Evaluations?

Conditional economic incentives for reducing HIV risk behaviors: Integration of psychology and behavioral economics.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About