Publication:

Credible causal inference for empirical legal studies

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2011

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Annual Reviews
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Ho, Daniel E., and Donald B. Rubin. 2011. Credible causal inference for empirical legal studies. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 7, no. 1: 17–40. doi:10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-102510-105423.

Abstract

We review advances toward credible causal inference that have wide application for empirical legal studies. Our chief point is simple: Research design trumps methods of analysis. We explain matching and regression discontinuity approaches in intuitive (nontechnical) terms. To illustrate, we apply these to existing data on the impact of prison facilities on inmate misconduct, which we compare to experimental evidence. What unifies modern approaches to causal inference is the prioritization of research design to create—without reference to any outcome data—subsets of comparable units. Within those subsets, outcome differences may then be plausibly attributed to exposure to the treatment rather than control condition. Traditional methods of analysis play a small role in this venture. Credible causal inference in law turns on substantive legal, not mathematical, knowledge.

Description

Other Available Sources

Research Data

Keywords

research design, policy evaluation, matching, regression discontinuity

Terms of Use

Metadata Only

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Related Stories