Book contents
- Measuring Compliance
- Measuring Compliance
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- 1 Measuring Compliance: The Challenges in Assessing and Understanding the Interaction between Law and Organizational Misconduct
- Part 1 The Compliance Industry, the State, and Measurement Needs
- Part 2 Quantitative Approaches to Measuring Corporate Compliance
- 5 Self-Report Surveys and Factorial Survey Experiments
- 6 The Use of Randomized Experiments for Assessing Corporate Compliance
- 7 Measuring Corporate Compliance: A Guide to Using Available Firm Data to Improve Employee Behavior
- 8 Measuring Compliance Risk and the Emergence of Analytics
- 9 Using Regulatory Inspection Data to Measure Environmental Compliance
- 10 Using Outcomes to Measure Aggregate-Level Compliance – Justifications, Challenges, and Practices
- Part 3 Qualitative Approaches to Measuring Corporate Compliance
- Part 4 Mixed Methods and Building on Existing Compliance Research
- Index
- References
6 - The Use of Randomized Experiments for Assessing Corporate Compliance
from Part 2 - Quantitative Approaches to Measuring Corporate Compliance
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 February 2022
Book contents
- Measuring Compliance
- Measuring Compliance
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- 1 Measuring Compliance: The Challenges in Assessing and Understanding the Interaction between Law and Organizational Misconduct
- Part 1 The Compliance Industry, the State, and Measurement Needs
- Part 2 Quantitative Approaches to Measuring Corporate Compliance
- 5 Self-Report Surveys and Factorial Survey Experiments
- 6 The Use of Randomized Experiments for Assessing Corporate Compliance
- 7 Measuring Corporate Compliance: A Guide to Using Available Firm Data to Improve Employee Behavior
- 8 Measuring Compliance Risk and the Emergence of Analytics
- 9 Using Regulatory Inspection Data to Measure Environmental Compliance
- 10 Using Outcomes to Measure Aggregate-Level Compliance – Justifications, Challenges, and Practices
- Part 3 Qualitative Approaches to Measuring Corporate Compliance
- Part 4 Mixed Methods and Building on Existing Compliance Research
- Index
- References
Summary
Abstract: This chapter reviews the utility of experimental methodology for compliance scholarship, describing various types of experiments and their benefits. Specifically, experiments are best suited for establishing the causal impact of a program or policy designed to impact compliance behavior – in other words, did that policy truly cause a change in behavior? With random assignment to “treatment” and “control” groups, researchers can be much more confident in their conclusions about program or policy effectiveness. However, there are limitations to experimental designs that must be considered as well.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Measuring ComplianceAssessing Corporate Crime and Misconduct Prevention, pp. 108 - 119Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Burtless, Gary. 1995. The case for randomized field trials in economic and policy research. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(2), 63–84.Google Scholar
Congdon, William J., Kling, Jeffrey R., Ludwig, Jens, and Mullainathan., Sendhil 2017. Social policy: Mechanism experiments and policy evaluations. In Banerjee, Abhijit Vinayak and Duflo, Esther, eds., Handbook of Field Experiments. Elsevier Science and Technology.Google Scholar
Feldman, Yuval and Lobel, Orly. 2008. Decentralized enforcement in organizations: An experimental approach. Regulation & Governance, 2, 165–92.Google Scholar
Gerber, Alan S. and Green, Donald P.. 2008. Field experiments and natural experiments. In Box-Steffensmeier, Janet M., Brady, Henry E., and Collier, David, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology. Oxford Handbooks Online, doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199286546.003.0015.Google Scholar
Guttentag, Michael D., Porath, Christine L., and Fraidin, Samuel N.. 2008. Brandeis’ policeman: Results from a laboratory experiment on how to prevent corporate fraud. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 5(2), 239–73.Google Scholar
Hallsworth, Michael. 2014. The use of field experiments to increase tax compliance. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 30(4), 658–79.Google Scholar
Harrison, Glenn W. and List, John A.. 2004. Field experiments. Journal of Economic Literature, 42(4), 1009–55.Google Scholar
Heckman, James J. and Smith, Jeffrey A.. 1995. Assessing the case for social experiments. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(2), 85–110.Google Scholar
Malesky, Edmund and Taussig, Markus. 2019. Participation, government legitimacy, and regulatory compliance in emerging economies: A firm-level field experiment in Vietnam. American Political Science Review, 113(2), 530–51.Google Scholar
Morton, Rebecca B. and Williams, Kenneth C.. 2008. Experimentation in political science. In Box-Steffensmeier, Janet M., Brady, Henry E., and Collier, David, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology. Oxford Handbooks Online, doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199286546.003.0014.Google Scholar
Sampson, Robert J. 2010. Gold standard myths: Observations on the experimental turn in quantitative criminology. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26, 489–500.Google Scholar
Schutt, Russell K. 2015. Investigating the Social World: The Process and Practice of Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Stokols, Daniel, McMahan, Shari, Clitheroe, H. C. Jr., and Wells, Meredith. 2001. Enhancing corporate compliance with worksite safety and health legislation. Journal of Safety Research, 32, 441–63.Google Scholar
Thorley, Dane R. (in press). Compliance experiments in the field: Features, limitations, and examples. In Rooij, Benjamin van and Sokol, D. Daniel, eds., The Cambridge Handbook of Compliance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Vollaard, Ben and van Ours, Jan C.. 2011. Does regulation of built‐in security reduce crime? Evidence from a natural experiment. The Economic Journal, 121(552), 485–504.Google Scholar
Weisburd, David. 2010. Justifying the use of non-experimental methods and disqualifying the use of randomized controlled trials: Challenging folklore in evaluation research in crime and justice. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 6, 209–27.Google Scholar
Weisburd, David, Lum, Cynthia M., and Petrosino, Anthony. 2001. Does research design affect study outcomes in criminal justice? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578(1), 50–70.Google Scholar
Weisburd, David, Petrosino, Anthony, and Fronius, Trevor. 2013. Randomized experiments in criminology and criminal justice. In Bruinsma, Gerben and Weisburd, David, eds., Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Welsh, Brandon C., Braga, Anthony A., and Bruinsma, Gerben J. N.. 2013. New perspectives and developments in experimental criminology. Policing, 7(4), 411–18.Google Scholar