Effects of Sample Size and Budget Allocation.pptx

I am Susanna R. Burnett , an Economics Assignment Expert at economicsassignmenthelp.com. I hold a Master’s in Economics from Idaho University and have been assisting students for 5 years. Visit our website or email [email protected]. Call [phone] for help with assignments. In our sample assignment solution, we delve into "Optimizing Experimental Design: Effects of Sample Size and Budget Allocation on Study Outcomes," where we provide a comprehensive analysis of experimental design, the impact of sample size, and strategic budget allocation. This equips you with practical knowledge and skills for academic and professional success.

1. Visit us: www.economicsassignmenthelp.com/ Mail us : [email protected] Call us: [phone] Economics Assignment Help Topic - Effects of Sample Size and Budget Allocation

2. Welcome to EconomicsAssignmentHelp.com, your premier destination for mastering economic principles through practical examples. In this sample, we delve into the intricacies of experimental design in economics. We explore the optimal allocation of treatment and control groups to minimize sampling variance, essential for accurately measuring the impact of interventions like job search assistance programs. Our approach showcases how strategic allocation decisions can enhance the reliability and efficiency of economic research, ensuring robust conclusions in real-world applications. Optimizing Experimental Design: Effects of Sample Size and Budget Allocation on Study Outcomes

3. This problem asks you to use SAS to conduct a series of sampling experiments. You are asked to conduct a social experiment to measure the effects of a Job Search Assistance program designed to help unemployed workers find jobs. You will do this by randomly choosing n1 experimental subjects and n2 control subjects from a pool of n1+n2=n unemployed workers who were selected at random from the population of new Unemployment Insurance claimants in Massachussetts . Question:

4. Answer W ith designing a social experiment to measure the effects of a Job Search Assistance program. Here's a structured approach to conducting this experiment: 1. Experimental Design: Random Selection of Participants: From a pool of nnn unemployed workers, where n=n1+n2n = n_1 + n_2n=n1​+n2​, randomly select: n1n_1n1​ experimental subjects (who will receive the Job Search Assistance program). n2n_2n2​ control subjects (who will not receive any special assistance and will serve as the baseline comparison).

5. 3. Selection Criteria: Participants are selected from the population of new Unemployment Insurance claimants in Massachusetts, ensuring they are recent unemployed individuals. 4. Implementation of the Job Search Assistance Program: Implement the assistance program for the n1n_1n1​ experimental subjects. This program could include services such as resume building, job matching, interview coaching, etc.

6. 5. Control Group Setup: The n2n_2n2​ control subjects do not receive any additional assistance beyond what is normally available (standard unemployment benefits). 6. Data Collection: Gather relevant data on both groups over a specified period (e.g., 6 months). Data to collect includes: Time taken to find employment. Type and quality of employment obtained. Self-reported satisfaction and effectiveness of the job search process. Any other relevant metrics related to job search outcomes.

7. Analysis: Compare the outcomes between the experimental group (Job Search Assistance recipients) and the control group. Use statistical methods such as hypothesis testing (e.g., t-tests, chi-square tests) to determine if there are significant differences in job search outcomes between the two groups. Example Hypotheses: Null Hypothesis (H₀): There is no difference in the average time taken to find employment between the experimental and control groups. Alternative Hypothesis (H₁): The average time taken to find employment is shorter for the experimental group compared to the control group.

8. Based on the analysis of the collected data, you would draw conclusions about the effectiveness of the Job Search Assistance program in helping unemployed individuals find jobs compared to those without such assistance. This structured approach should help you design and conduct your social experiment effectively. If you have specific questions about statistical methods or data analysis, feel free to ask!

9. A) Find the choice of proportion treated, p=n1/n, that minimizes the sampling variance of the difference in employment rates between treatment and controls. (Treat n as a known constant) Soulution : To find the proportion p=n1np = \ frac {n_1}{n}p=nn1​​ that minimizes the sampling variance of the difference in employment rates between treatment and control groups, let's proceed with the following steps: Define Variables and Assumptions:

10. 2. Sampling Variance of the Difference: 3. Minimizing the Sampling Variance:

11. 4. Calculation:

12. 5. Conclusion:

13. b. Now assume that it costs " dollars to collect data on anyone in your experiment and that the job search assistance provided to the experimental group costs $ dollars. You can choose any sample size (n) but you must spend no more than R dollars on the experiment. Again, maintaining the assumption that there is no treatment effect, solve for the value of p which minimizes the variance of the treatment/control contrast given the experimenter’s budget constraint. Interpret your result and compare to part (a).

14. Solution: To solve for the proportion p=n1np = \ frac {n_1}{n}p=nn1​​ that minimizes the variance of the treatment/control contrast given a budget constraint, we need to consider both the cost of data collection and the cost of providing job search assistance to the experimental group.

15. 1. Cost Constraints:

16. 3. Variance of Treatment/Control Contrast: 4. Optimization under Budget Constraint:

17. 4. Interpretation and Comparison: The optimal proportion ppp under the budget constraint will likely differ from the proportion that minimizes variance without budget considerations (part a). In part (a), ppp is chosen solely based on minimizing variance, whereas in part (b), ppp is constrained by the budget, leading to a trade-off between sample size and treatment group size. A larger nnn allows for a larger sample size and potentially more balanced treatment/control groups, but constraints on CCC limit the extent to which n1n_1n1​ can be increased.

18. while part (a) focuses on minimizing variance without budget constraints, part (b) demonstrates the practical considerations of conducting experiments within a limited budget, impacting the optimal choice of ppp .

19. c. Why is it useful to do exercises like (a) and (b) while assuming there is actually no treatment effect? Assuming no treatment effect in exercises like (a) and (b) allows researchers to focus on optimizing experimental design and resource allocation without confounding variables. By isolating these factors, researchers can systematically explore how different sample sizes, treatment allocations, and budget constraints affect the precision and efficiency of their experiments. This approach helps in developing robust methodologies that can be applied in real-world scenarios where treatment effects may vary, ensuring that resources are used effectively and results are reliable under varying conditions.

20. Conclusion By assuming no treatment effect in exercises (a) and (b), researchers can refine experimental designs under controlled conditions. This approach enhances understanding of how variables like sample size and budget allocation impact study outcomes, laying a strong foundation for conducting impactful and efficient research in applied settings.