Ah frustrating! I'm surprised Tyler didn't say yes, given your previous blog posts.
Random thought - maybe it's worth applying to EAF/LTFF for replicating EA specific papers?
Michael, I love your work (blog). Other than FTX, have you tried other avenues for funding this?
Nice suggestion - and good to see you here on the EAF Ryan!
Happy to see this initiative!
These are great Gavin.It's been a while since I worked on global development issues (largely focusing on NTDs back in 2014/15) but did Farmer not also help popularise the biosocial approach (which I thought had a large impact) ? No mention of 'biosocial' on the wiki page though.
I think it's this paper http://evavivalt.com/wp-content/uploads/Weighing-the-Evidence.pdf. Fwiw, all of Eva's papers are worth reading!
Sidenote - love your work and WiP (I'm also part of the PS community). Hope to see you on the EAF again!
Actually I could be incorrect. I think Eva Vivalt has a paper on this (no time to dig up right now).
One indirect advantage of RCTs is that I'd guess (I'd imagine this has been tested somewhere) that they are easier to understand compared to other causal inference methods. Maybe that makes it easier to pitch to people who aren't trained in statistics (often policy makers).Not sure of this though...
Fwiw, I'd imagine you are all less succumb to weighting other evaluators negative points (different interests at play to journal reviewers) - but still may be a bias here.
Peaked my curiosity, what sort of clever thing?