this is part of a series of joint posts with suvojit. it is also cross-posted at people, spaces, deliberation. throughout this series of posts (1, 2, 3, 4), we have considered two main issues. first, how can evidence and evaluation be shaped to be made more useful – that is, directly useable – in guidingContinueContinue reading “have evidence, will… um, erm (5 of 6, revisibility)”
Category Archives: Research
i’m not sure that means what you think it means (gold standard)
some thoughts, from peter byass, here, for the next time you want to refer to a technique as the ‘gold standard’ and what may be behind such a guarantee: The verbal autopsy literature has extensively used and abused the concept of “gold standards” for validating cause of death determination. Metallurgists would say that 100% pureContinueContinue reading “i’m not sure that means what you think it means (gold standard)”
have evidence, will… um, erm? (4 of 6, going public)
this is a joint post with suvojit. it is also posted on people, spaces, deliberation. in our last post, we discussed how establishing “relevant reasons” for decision-making ex ante may enhance the legitimacy and fairness of deliberations on resource allocation. we also highlight that setting relevant decision-making criteria can inform evaluation design by highlighting whatContinueContinue reading “have evidence, will… um, erm? (4 of 6, going public)”
further thoughts on phase-in/pipeline designs for causal inference
not long back, i put down my thoughts (here) about pipeline or phase-in designs. my basic premise is that while they may allow for causal inference, it is not clear that they are usually designed to allow generated evidence to be used where it is most relevant — to that program itself. that seems badContinueContinue reading “further thoughts on phase-in/pipeline designs for causal inference”
losing the “different worlds” talk
this post is an elaboration of my tweet on the nytimes’ op-ed, “the end of the developing world”, by Dayo Olopade. the essay is good and important. imbibe it. here’s a sip: it’s tough to pick a satisfying replacement. talk of first, second and third worlds is passé, and it’s hard to bear the DickensianContinueContinue reading “losing the “different worlds” talk”
have evidence, will… um, erm (2 of 2)
this is the second in a series of posts with suvojit (and cross-posted here), initially planned as a series of two but growing to six… reminder: the scenario in our last post, we set up a scenario that we* have both seen several times: a donor or large implementing agency (our focus, though we think our arguments applyContinueContinue reading “have evidence, will… um, erm (2 of 2)”
it’s all just a little bit of history repeating
(soundtrack.) this is an idea i have been turning over for some time in my head but will finally put out there since i am too exhausted to do any other work and or to care any longer if it makes sense (that said, it does seem that some seemingly smart people have suggested similarContinueContinue reading “it’s all just a little bit of history repeating”
have evidence, will… um, erm? (1 of 2)
this is a joint post with suvojit chattopadhyay, also cross-posted here. commissioning evidence among those who talk about development & welfare policy/programs/projects, it is tres chic to talk about evidence-informed decision-making (including the evidence on evidence-informed decision-making and the evidence on the evidence on…[insert infinite recursion]). this concept — formerly best-known as evidence-based policy-making –ContinueContinue reading “have evidence, will… um, erm? (1 of 2)”
I’m pretty cool with the fact that very few* women get prostate cancer (talking about inequality, in advance of #SOTU)
Lots of people have commented recently on even-more-famous people (President Obama, the Pope) commenting on inequality. This incidental economist post is particularly clear and helpful. The main, brief point I want to make here is about precision of language. ‘Inequality’ is a word that should rarely be used alone. It is much more helpful toContinueContinue reading “I’m pretty cool with the fact that very few* women get prostate cancer (talking about inequality, in advance of #SOTU)”
Anecdotes and simple observations are dangerous; words and narratives are not.
*this blog post was also cross-posted on people, spaces, deliberation, including as one of the top 10 posts of 2014. In a recent blog post on stories, and following some themes from an earlier talk by Tyler Cowen, David Evans ends by suggesting: “Vivid and touching tales move us more than statistics. So let’s listenContinueContinue reading “Anecdotes and simple observations are dangerous; words and narratives are not.”
Heather E. Lanthorn 