What makes randomized controlled trials so successful-for now? Or, on the consonances, compromises, and contradictions of a global interstitial field
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 2059990 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Malte Neuwinger (0000-0002-9729-4951, Bielefeld University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 53 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 1213-1244 |
| Publication date | 2024-10-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Theory and Society (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0304-2421 • E-ISSN: 1573-7853 |
| Publisher | Springer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s11186-024-09564-5 |
| OpenAlex | W4399856352 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 86 |
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are a major success story, promising to improve science and policy. Despite some controversy, RCTs have spread toward Northern and Southern countries since the early 2000s. How so? Synthesizing previous research on this question, this article argues that favorable institutional conditions turned RCTs into 'hinges' between the fields of science, politics, and business. Shifts toward behavioral economics, New Public Management, and evidence-based philanthropic giving led to a cross-fertilization among efforts in rich and poor countries, involving states, international organizations, NGOs, researchers, and philanthropic foundations. This confluence of favorable institutional conditions and savvy social actors established a 'global interstitial field' inside which support for RCTs has developed an unprecedented scope, influence, operational capacity, and professional payoff. However, the article further argues that the hinges holding together this global interstitial field are 'squeaky' at best. Because actors inherit the illusio of their respective fields of origin-their central incentives and stakes-the interstitial field produces constant goal conflicts. Cooperation between academics and practitioners turns out to be plagued by tensions and contradictions. Based on this analysis, the article concludes that the global field of RCT support will probably differentiate into its constituent parts. As a result, RCTs may lose the special status they have gained among social science and policy evaluation methods, turning into one good technique among others
Engineering ethics · Pathology · Political science · Randomized controlled trial · Sociology · Data Analysis and Archiving · Engineering · Mathematics · Medicine · Mental Health and Patient Involvement · Primary Care and Health Outcomes
Deworming Delusions? Mass Drug Administration in East African Schools
Reputation and Power
How Far to Nudge?
Model Cases
Think Tanks in America
What Works?
From old public administration to new public management
Institutional Logics
Six Randomized Evaluations of Microcredit
Goodbye Washington Consensus, Hello Washington Confusion? A Review of the World Bank's Economic Growth in the 1990s
Libertarian Paternalism
Handbook of Sociological Science
Bourdieu’s Dyad
Survey-Welten
World Development Report 2015
The Experimental Approach to Development Economics
When Experiments Travel
Nudge and evidence based policy
Ideas and Change in U.S. Foreign Aid
The Role of Policy Labs in Policy Experiment and Knowledge Transfer
Radical Incrementalism
Experimentalism and development evaluation
Four Waves of Evaluation Diffusion
Poor Economics
Current Challenges in Impact Evaluation
Advancing the Empirical Study of Performance Management
The new randomised controlled trials (RCT) movement in public policy
The Legacy of the New Public Management in Developing Countries
What is a global field? Theorizing fields beyond the nation-state
Reforms as experiments
Who nudges whom? Expert opinions on behavioural field experiments with public partners
What's New about the New Public Management? Administrative Change in the Human Services
Behavioural insights teams in practice
Field Experiments and the Political Economy of Development
Broadening the range of designs and methods for impact evaluations
The Role of Evaluation in Building Evidence-Based Policy
The Roles Foundations Are Playing in the Evidence-Based Policy Movement
The Institute of Education Sciences
The Office of Management and Budget
How fields vary
Let's Not Have the Perfect Be the Enemy of the Good
Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials
The Credibility Revolution in Empirical Economics
Politics done like science
Behavioral Economics
Mechanism Experiments and Policy Evaluations
Evaluating Welfare Reform Waivers Under Section 1115
All that Glitters is not Gold. The Political Economy of Randomized Evaluations in Development
An Invitation of Reflexive Sociology
Practice and symbolic power in Bourdieu
Between social spaces
The Coming Crisis of Empirical Sociology
Field Experiments Across the Social Sciences
Linked Ecologies
Facts, power and global evidence
The rise of the randomistas
Behavioural economics, experimentalism and the marketization of development
The rise of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in international development in historical perspective
The social space and the genesis of groups
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |