These types of robustness checks are given on the standard investigations statement (Dive one thousand Comparison Team 2016)

C. Statistical Research

To examine system outcomes on the IPV and you may routes, the analysis cheated the application of an excellent cutoff endurance applied to a continuous system qualifications index (PMT get) to understand treatment and you may assessment teams. Ergo, email address details are valid towards population within the endurance and you will perform perhaps not represent a complete shipments regarding socioeconomic condition in the analysis organizations. While the an excellent discontinuity is utilized into assignment of treatment, we ensure the fresh new problems that generally have to hold to own an everyday regression discontinuity construction approach to end up being valid within studies, and additionally no manipulation on threshold or experience with the new formula of the potential beneficiaries so you’re able to determine its qualification position. This new official sample off balance anywhere between investigations and you can medication communities are together with stated to your current sample into the tables dos and you will step three (col. 10). In the total centering on get it done held, the latest PMT ratings varied away from ?step 3.294 to help you 4.601 z-results, through the analysis shot, brand new PMT results start around ?0.571 to 0.324 z-results, into the program qualification cutoff within ?0.106 z-score ( simple departure = 0.32 ). 6 Domiciles was in fact systematically tested inside the cutoff to have investigations motives, additionally the resulting homes from the therapy shot is actually inside 0.46 standard deviations of cutoff, and all of comparison home try within 0.43 basic deviations of your own cutoff. Considering the short tolerance of the shipment out of tested properties up to the newest PMT rating, a straightforward Did was applied to check brand new impacts of one’s program: 7

Manage variables used in the study included personal- and home-peak evidence and you will area-height repaired outcomes. 8 At private peak, i regulated to possess many years (in years) and you can indicators your certified training out-of both girl and you will partner. 9 After that, inside the studies of your full test, we control to be during the an effective polygamous union (reference group try nonpolygamous or, for simple malfunction, a great monogamous relationship). Household-level control parameters provided home dimensions therefore the PMT rating. 10 We statement the fresh new a style of all of the region indication details inside detailed equilibrium and attrition dining tables; however, as we become people-level fixed effects, these symptoms commonly included in regression investigation (districts: Eastern Mamprusi, Karaga, and Yendi regarding Northern Part and Bongo and you can Garu Tempane about Higher Eastern Area). To assess variations from the household members framework, we work together new indication for polygamous relationship toward cures indication, day signal, and impression guess (undertaking a triple interaction identity): eleven

D. Attrition

Attrition over the panel period has potential to threaten the internal validity and generalizability of the findings. Overall attrition in our analytic sample is approximately 10%, slightly higher than the overall household sample rate of 6.6%, and does not vary significantly between treatment and comparison samples ( p -value = .35 using a simple t-test; Table 1). Further, we investigate whether the sample lost to follow-up differs significantly from our panel sample in terms of IPV outcomes, control variables, or pathway indicators (tables 2, 3). Column 7 shows the mean difference between the sample lost to follow-up in the treatment group, as compared with the same in the comparison group. Column dating apps for Dog adults 8 shows the p-value of this difference derived from a regression using treatment to predict the specific indicator, controlling for the PMT score and restricting to attritors. Table 2 shows that across 12 background characteristics and 14 pathway variables, only one is significant at the p < .05 level (there is a statistically significantly higher proportion of the treatment group lost to follow-up as compared with the comparison group in Bongo district). Table 3 shows that across 15 outcome indicators, the only ones to show evidence of differential attrition at p < .05 or lower are those measuring the frequency of sexual IPV (means of those lost to follow-up in the comparison group are slightly higher at .28 vs. the treatment group at .26). These results indicate that the potential for bias in overall findings due to attrition is low. Despite these promising results, we do find that women leaving our sample across both treatment arms differ in terms of background characteristics from those who remain in our sample (p-values shown in cols. 3 and 6). For example, women who leave the sample are generally younger, better educated, in monogamous partnerships (vs. polygamous), and live in smaller households. This may be reflective of rural-to-urban migration or other mobility patterns, although these differences are not generally observed for pathway variables, including indicators of economic standing.