Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Evaluation Review
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schochet, P. Z.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Schochet, P. Z.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

An Approach for Addressing the Multiple Testing Problem in Social Policy Impact Evaluations

Peter Z. Schochet

Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., Princeton, New Jersey, pschochet{at}mathematica-mpr.com

In social policy evaluations, the multiple testing problem occurs due to the many hypothesis tests that are typically conducted across multiple outcomes and subgroups, which can lead to spurious impact findings. This article discusses a framework for addressing this problem that balances Types I and II errors. The framework involves specifying confirmatory and exploratory analyses in study protocols, delineating confirmatory outcome domains, conducting t tests on composite domain outcomes, and applying multiplicity corrections to composites across domains to obtain summative impact evidence. The article presents statistical background and discusses multiplicity issues for subgroup analyses, designs with multiple treatments, and reporting.

Key Words: multiple comparisons • impact evaluations • design of experiments

Evaluation Review, Vol. 33, No. 6, 539-567 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X09350590
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?