Suchergebnisse

Family researchers are increasingly concerned with causal inference. In this article, I urge family researchers to consider 2 types of causal inference: pretreatment heterogeneity, a consideration of nonrandom selection into a treatment (e.g., divorce), and posttreatment heterogeneity, a consideration of systematic differential responses to a treatment. I detail the heterogeneous treatment effects approach, a method designed to account for both pretreatment heterogeneity and posttreatment heterogeneity. I then review existing research that has implemented this method, paying particular attention to research on family life. Finally, I provide concrete examples of how family researchers can implement heterogeneous treatment effects to answer key research questions.

A variety of response effects that had been found previously in interview surveys were tested in a mail survey of a heterogeneous local population. Results supported earlier findings based on student samples which had shown that order effects were eliminated in self-administered surveys but that question-form effects occurred as in interview surveys. (Abstract amended)

Abstract.  A number of studies have indicated that peer smoking is a highly influential factor in a young person's decision to smoke. However, this finding is suspect, because the studies often fail to account for selection and simultaneity bias. This paper develops an econometric model of youth smoking that incorporates both peer effects and selection effects. Identification is achieved by using the degree of selection on observables as a proxy for the degree of selection on unobservables. The results indicate that peers have some influence on a young person's decision to smoke, but that influence is much weaker than is suggested by reduced form models. JEL classification: C35, I12

A letter report issued by the General Accounting Office with an abstract that begins "Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the National Gambling Impact Study Commission's (NGISC) case study on gambling, focusing on: (1) the economic effects of gambling, particularly on employment, bankruptcy, and tax revenues and community investment; (2) the social effects of gambling; (3) the prevalence of pathological gambling; and (4) whether communities offer incentives to attract gambling establishments."