Suchergebnisse

Field experimentation enables researchers to draw unbiased & externally valid causal inferences about social processes. Despite these strengths, field experimentation is seldom used in political science, which relies instead on observational studies & laboratory experiments. This article contends that political scientists underestimate the value of field experimentation & overestimate their ability to draw secure causal inferences from other types of data. After reviewing the history of experimentation in the discipline, the authors discuss the advantages & disadvantages of field experimental methods. They conclude by describing a number of research topics that seem amenable to experimental inquiry. [Copyright 2003 Sage Publications, Inc.]

The debate about the cost-effectiveness of randomized field experimentation ignores one of the most important potential uses of experimental data. This article defines and illustrates "downstream" experimental analysis—that is, analysis of the indirect effects of experimental interventions. We argue that downstream analysis may be as valuable as conventional analysis, perhaps even more so in the case of laboratory experimentation.

Discusses the value of field experimentation in political science. The key features of experiments are elaborated, demonstrating why well-conducted experiments are more persuasive arbiters of causality than comparable nonexperimental research. Issues arising in the design & analysis of experiments in the field & laboratory are addressed, scrutinizing literature featuring both types of investigation. Applications for field experimentation are considered before attending to the leading criticisms against experimentation centered on the inability to manipulate key political variables, cost & logistics, external & internal validity, generation of contradictory results, production of no clear-cut sense of causality in some cases, the capacity to narrow the scope of inquiry, & ethics. These criticisms are found wanting, & it is argued that randomized intervention into real-world settings should be a prominent methodology. J. Zendejas

Reports on a field experiment that tested the impact of pre-election telephone calls on voter turnout. Earlier studies describing the positive effects of phone mobilization made no attempt to look at the impact of specific conditions or types of appeals. Data were obtained from evaluating get-out-the-vote phone calls made to 17,100 registered voters in West Haven, CT, a town of 54,000 people. The calls, made during the three days preceding the 1998 general elections, were separated into three groups that used different scripts to remind voters of the upcoming election. The first script ended, "We hope you'll come out & vote," while the second asked, "Can we count on you to vote this Tuesday?" The last script provided a benchmark for comparison by asking respondents to donate blood to an upcoming Red Cross blood drive. Voter records were used to compare individuals called/not called with turnout rates. The results indicated that nonpartisan calls did not increase turnout rates. Reasons why these findings differed from previous studies are discussed. 3 Tables, 1 Appendix, 13 References. J. Lindroth

We report the results of a randomized field experiment involving approximately 30,000 registered voters in New Haven, Connecticut. Nonpartisan get-out-the-vote messages were conveyed through personal canvassing, direct mail, and telephone calls shortly before the November 1998 election. A variety of substantive messages were used. Voter turnout was increased substantially by personal canvassing, slightly by direct mail, and not at all by telephone calls. These findings support our hypothesis that the long-term retrenchment in voter turnout is partly attributable to the decline in face-to-face political mobilization.

A field experiment assessed the effects of a nonpartisan voter mobilization drive. On the weekend before the 1998 general election, voters in the treatment group received an 8 x 11 inch card on which was printed a nonpartisan encouragement to vote. This treatment had no effect on the turnout rates of registered Republicans & Democrats, but it increased the turnout of those voters unaffiliated with a major party by approximately 7%. We find that the treatment was particularly effective at increasing voting among those unaffiliated voters who voted in 1996. 3 Tables, 1 Appendix, 18 References. Adapted from the source document.

We report the results of a randomized field experiment involving approximately 30,000 registered voters in New Haven, CT. Nonpartisan get-out-the-vote messages were conveyed through personal canvassing, direct mail, & telephone calls shortly before the Nov 1998 election. A variety of substantive messages were used. Voter turnout was increased substantially by personal canvassing, slightly by direct mail, & not at all by telephone calls. These findings support our hypothesis that the long-term retrenchment in voter turnout is partly attributable to the decline in face-to-face political mobilization. 5 Tables, 1 Appendix, 36 References. Adapted from the source document.

This paper reports the results of a randomized field experiment involving registered voters in the city of New Haven. Nonpartisan get-out-the-vote messages were delivered through personal canvassing shortly before the November 1998 election. We find that personal canvassing increased voter turnout by ≈6. The effect of personal contact seems to be slightly smaller for voters registered with a major political party and higher for unaffiliated voters, although the hypothesis that all voters are equally affected could not be rejected. Study of several alternative political messages provided equivocal evidence suggesting the superiority of a canvassing appeal that emphasizes the closeness of the election.