When does Regression discontinuity design work? Evidence from random election outcomes
Loading...
Access rights
openAccess
URL
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
A1 Alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä
This publication is imported from Aalto University research portal.
View publication in the Research portal (opens in new window)
View/Open full text file from the Research portal (opens in new window)
Other link related to publication (opens in new window)
View publication in the Research portal (opens in new window)
View/Open full text file from the Research portal (opens in new window)
Other link related to publication (opens in new window)
Date
2018-07
Department
Major/Subject
Mcode
Degree programme
Language
en
Pages
33
1019-1051
1019-1051
Series
QUANTITATIVE ECONOMICS, Volume 9, issue 2
Abstract
We use elections data in which a large number of ties in vote counts between candidates are resolved via a lottery to study the personal incumbency advantage. We benchmark non-experimental regression discontinuity design (RDD) estimates against the estimate produced by this experiment that takes place exactly at the cutoff. The experimental estimate suggests that there is no personal incumbency advantage. In contrast, conventional local polynomial RDD estimates suggest a moderate and statistically significant effect. Bias-corrected RDD estimates that apply robust inference are, however, in line with the experimental estimate. Therefore, state-of-the-art implementation of RDD can meet the replication standard in the context of close elections.Description
Keywords
close elections, experiment, incumbency advantage, regression discontinuity design
Other note
Citation
Hyytinen, A, Meriläinen, J, Saarimaa, T, Toivanen, O & Tukiainen, J 2018, ' When does Regression discontinuity design work? Evidence from random election outcomes ', QUANTITATIVE ECONOMICS, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 1019-1051 . https://doi.org/10.3982/QE864