Sources of selection bias in evaluating social programs: An interpretation of conventional measures and evidence on the effectiveness of matching as a program evaluation method

This paper decomposes the conventional measure of selection bias in observational studies into three components. The first two components are due to differences in the distributions of characteristics between participant and nonparticipant (comparison) group members: the first arises from differences in the supports, and the second from differences in densities over the region of common support. The third component arises from selection bias precisely defined. Using data from a recent social experiment, we find that the component due to selection bias, precisely defined, is smaller than the first two components. However, selection bias still represents a substantial fraction of the experimental impact estimate. The empirical performance of matching methods of program evaluation is also examined. We find that matching based on the propensity score eliminates some but not all of the measured selection bias, with the remaining bias still a substantial fraction of the estimated impact. We find that the support of the distribution of propensity scores for the comparison group is typically only a small portion of the support for the participant group. For values outside the common support, it is impossible to reliably estimate the effect of program participation using matching methods. If the impact of participation depends on the propensity score, as we find in our data, the failure of the common support condition severely limits matching compared with random assignment as an evaluation estimator.

Designing a library: everyone on the same page?

Excerpts are presented from an interview by the Bulletin of the Medical Library Association buildings projects editor with four academic health sciences library directors: one who had recently completed a major library building project and three who were involved in various stages of new building projects. They share their experiences planning for and implementing library-building programs. The interview explores driving forces leading to new library buildings, identifies who should be involved, recalls the most difficult and exciting moments of the building projects, relates what they wished they had known before starting the project, assesses the impact of new library facilities on clients and services, reviews what they would change, and describes forces impacting libraries today and attributes of the twenty-first century library.