Abstract

Although nonexperimental studies find robust neighborhood effects on adults, such findings have been challenged by results from the Moving to Opportunity (MTO) residential mobility experiment. Using a within-study comparison design, this article compares experimental and nonexperimental estimates from MTO and a parallel analysis of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID). Striking similarities were found between nonexperimental estimates based on MTO and PSID. No clear evidence was found that different estimates are related to duration of adult exposure to disadvantaged neighborhoods, nonlinear effects of neighborhood conditions, magnitude of the change in neighborhood context, frequency of moves, treatment effect heterogeneity, or measurement, although the uncertainty bands around our estimates were sometimes large. Another possibility is that MTO-induced moves might have been unusually disruptive, but results are inconsistent for that hypothesis. Taken together, the findings suggest that selection bias might account for evidence of neighborhood effects on adult economic outcomes in nonexperimental studies.

摘要

尽管非实验研究发现邻里关系对成年人有很强的影响，但这一发现受到了“走向机遇”（MTO）住宅流动性实验结果的挑战。本文采用研究内比较设计，比较了 MTO 的实验性和非实验性估计以及收入动态面板研究 (PSID) 的并行分析。基于 MTO 和 PSID 的非实验估计之间发现了惊人的相似之处。没有明确的证据表明，不同的估计与成年人接触弱势社区的持续时间、社区条件的非线性效应、社区环境变化的幅度、搬家频率、治疗效果异质性或测量有关，尽管我们周围的不确定性带估计有时很大。另一种可能性是，MTO 引发的变动可能具有异常的破坏性，但结果与该假设不一致。总而言之，研究结果表明，选择偏差可能是非实验研究中邻里对成人经济结果影响的证据。