Abstract
We investigate the impact of conflicts of interests on randomised controlled trials in a game‐theoretic framework. A researcher seeks to persuade an evaluator that the causal effect of a treatment outweighs its cost, to justify acceptance. The researcher can use private information to manipulate the experiment in three alternative ways: (i) sampling subjects based on their treatment effect, (ii) assigning subjects to treatment based on their baseline outcome, or (iii) selectively reporting experimental outcomes. The resulting biases have different welfare implications: for sufficiently high acceptance cost, in our binary illustration the evaluator loses in cases (i) and (iii) but benefits in case (ii).
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | The Economic Journal |
| Volume | 127 |
| Issue number | 605 |
| Pages (from-to) | F266-F304 |
| Number of pages | 39 |
| ISSN | 0013-0133 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Oct 2017 |
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver