6533b86cfe1ef96bd12c8302
RESEARCH PRODUCT
When does Regression discontinuity design work? Evidence from random election outcomes
Ari HyytinenTuukka SaarimaaJaakko MeriläinenOtto ToivanenJanne TukiainenJanne Tukiainensubject
H Social Sciences (General)Economics and EconometricskokeiluInferenceContext (language use)close electionsLotteryD72C52Benchmark (surveying)Political science0502 economics and businessReplication (statistics)ddc:330050602 political science & public administrationEconometricsCutoffregression discontinuity design050207 economicsestimointita112ta511experiment05 social sciencesContrast (statistics)0506 political scienceincumbency advantageRegression discontinuity designkokeet (tutkimustoiminta)C21vaalitvaalijärjestelmätdescription
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. Close elections experiment incumbency advantage regression discontinuity design C21 C52 D72
| year | journal | country | edition | language |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-01-01 | QUANTITATIVE ECONOMICS |