<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>1945-7782</issn>
<issn_online>1945-7790</issn_online>
<jrnti>American Economic Journal: Applied Economics</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej-applied/</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>1</vol>
<iss>4</iss>
<cd>October 2009</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/issue.php?journal=APP&volume=1&issue=4</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Journal Article</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>Do Television and Radio Destroy Social Capital? Evidence from Indonesian Villages</ti>
<augp>
<au><gnm>Benjamin A.</gnm><snm>Olken</snm><aff>MIT</aff></au>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>1</ppf>
<ppl>33</ppl>
</pp>
<ab>This paper investigates the impact of television and radio on social
capital in Indonesia. I use two sources of variation in signal reception -- 
one based on Indonesia's mountainous terrain, and a second
based on the differential introduction of private television throughout
Indonesia. I find that increased signal reception, which leads to
more time watching television and listening to the radio, is associated
with less participation in social organizations and with lower
self-reported trust. Improved reception does not affect village governance,
at least as measured by discussions in village meetings and
by corruption in village road projects. (JEL L82, O15, Z13)</ab>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/app.1.4.1</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/app.1.4.1</doi>
<dataset>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/data/2008-0083_data.zip</dataset>
<addt_matl_link>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/app/2008-0083_app.pdf</addtl_matl_link>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>1945-7782</issn>
<issn_online>1945-7790</issn_online>
<jrnti>American Economic Journal: Applied Economics</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej-applied/</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>1</vol>
<iss>4</iss>
<cd>October 2009</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/issue.php?journal=APP&volume=1&issue=4</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Journal Article</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>Peer Effects in the Workplace: Evidence from Random Groupings in Professional Golf Tournaments</ti>
<augp>
<au><gnm>Jonathan</gnm><snm>Guryan</snm><aff>U Chicago</aff></au>
<au><gnm>Kory</gnm><snm>Kroft</snm><aff>U CA, Berkeley</aff></au>
<au><gnm>Matthew J.</gnm><snm>Notowidigdo</snm><aff>MIT</aff></au>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>34</ppf>
<ppl>68</ppl>
</pp>
<ab>This paper uses random assignment in professional golf tournaments
to test for peer effects in the workplace. We find no evidence that
playing partners' ability affects performance, contrary to recent evidence
on peer effects in the workplace from laboratory experiments,
grocery scanners, and soft fruit pickers. In our preferred specification,
we can rule out peer effects larger than 0.043 strokes for a one
stroke increase in playing partners' ability. Our results complement
existing studies on workplace peer effects and are useful in explaining
how social effects vary across labor markets, across individuals,
and with the form of incentives faced. (JEL D83, J44, L83)</ab>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/app.1.4.34</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/app.1.4.34</doi>
<dataset>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/data/2008-0092_data.zip</dataset>
<addt_matl_link>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/app/2008-0092_app.pdf</addtl_matl_link>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>1945-7782</issn>
<issn_online>1945-7790</issn_online>
<jrnti>American Economic Journal: Applied Economics</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej-applied/</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>1</vol>
<iss>4</iss>
<cd>October 2009</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/issue.php?journal=APP&volume=1&issue=4</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Journal Article</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>The Effects of Peer Group Heterogeneity on the Production of Human Capital at West Point</ti>
<augp>
<au><gnm>David S.</gnm><snm>Lyle</snm><aff>US Military Academy, West Point</aff></au>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>69</ppf>
<ppl>84</ppl>
</pp>
<ab>Understanding how heterogeneity in peer group composition affects
academic attainment has important implications for how schools
organize students in group settings. The random assignment of cadets
to companies at West Point affords an opportunity to investigate this
issue empirically. Estimates of the impact of peer group heterogeneity
in math SAT scores on freshmen-year academic performance
reveals that more heterogeneous peer groups have positive effects on
individual grades. High-ability peers account for most of the positive
effect, while low-ability peers have no measureable effect. (JEL I23,
J24, M54)</ab>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/app.1.4.69</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/app.1.4.69</doi>
<dataset>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/data/2008-0169_data.zip</dataset>
<addt_matl_link>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/app/2008-0169_app.pdf</addtl_matl_link>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>1945-7782</issn>
<issn_online>1945-7790</issn_online>
<jrnti>American Economic Journal: Applied Economics</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej-applied/</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>1</vol>
<iss>4</iss>
<cd>October 2009</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/issue.php?journal=APP&volume=1&issue=4</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Journal Article</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>Teaching Students and Teaching Each Other: The Importance of Peer Learning for Teachers</ti>
<augp>
<au><gnm>C. Kirabo</gnm><snm>Jackson</snm><aff>Cornell U</aff></au>
<au><gnm>Elias</gnm><snm>Bruegmann</snm><aff>Cornerstone Research, Menlo Park, CA</aff></au>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>85</ppf>
<ppl>108</ppl>
</pp>
<ab>Using longitudinal elementary school teacher and student data, we
document that students have larger test score gains when their teachers
experience improvements in the observable characteristics of their
colleagues. Using within-school and within-teacher variation, we show
that a teacher's students have larger achievement gains in math and
reading when she has more effective colleagues (based on estimated
value-added from an out-of-sample pre-period). Spillovers are strongest
for less experienced teachers and persist over time, and historical
peer quality explains away about 20 percent of the own-teacher effect,
results that suggest peer learning. (JEL I21, J24, J45)</ab>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/app.1.4.85</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/app.1.4.85</doi>
<dataset>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/data/2008-0188_data.zip</dataset>
<addt_matl_link>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/app/2008-0188_app.pdf</addtl_matl_link>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>1945-7782</issn>
<issn_online>1945-7790</issn_online>
<jrnti>American Economic Journal: Applied Economics</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej-applied/</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>1</vol>
<iss>4</iss>
<cd>October 2009</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/issue.php?journal=APP&volume=1&issue=4</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Journal Article</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>Consumption Responses to In-Kind Transfers: Evidence from the Introduction of the Food Stamp Program</ti>
<augp>
<au><gnm>Hilary W.</gnm><snm>Hoynes</snm><aff>U CA, Davis</aff></au>
<au><gnm>Diane Whitmore</gnm><snm>Schanzenbach</snm><aff>U Chicago</aff></au>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>109</ppf>
<ppl>39</ppl>
</pp>
<ab>Economists have strong theoretical predictions about how in-kind
transfers, such as providing vouchers for food, impact consumption.
Despite the prominence of the theory, there is little empirical work
on responses to in-kind transfers, and most existing work fails to
support the canonical theoretical model. We employ difference-indifference
methods to estimate the impact of program introduction
on food spending. Consistent with predictions, we find that food
stamps reduce out-of-pocket food spending and increase overall
food expenditures. We also find that households are inframarginal
and respond similarly to one dollar in cash income and one dollar
in food stamps. (JEL D12, H23, I38)</ab>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/app.1.4.109</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/app.1.4.109</doi>
<dataset>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/data/2008-0081_data.zip</dataset>
<addt_matl_link>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/app/2008-0081_app.pdf</addtl_matl_link>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>1945-7782</issn>
<issn_online>1945-7790</issn_online>
<jrnti>American Economic Journal: Applied Economics</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej-applied/</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>1</vol>
<iss>4</iss>
<cd>October 2009</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/issue.php?journal=APP&volume=1&issue=4</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Journal Article</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>Iodine Deficiency and Schooling Attainment in Tanzania</ti>
<augp>
<au><gnm>Erica</gnm><snm>Field</snm><aff>Harvard U</aff></au>
<au><gnm>Omar</gnm><snm>Robles</snm><aff>Harvard U</aff></au>
<au><gnm>Maximo</gnm><snm>Torero</snm><aff>IFPRI</aff></au>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>140</ppf>
<ppl>69</ppl>
</pp>
<ab>Cognitive damage from iodine deficiency disorders (IDD) has important
implications for economic growth through its effect on human
capital. To gauge the magnitude of this influence, we evaluate the
impact on schooling of reductions in IDD from intensive iodine supplementation
in Tanzania. Our findings suggest a large effect of in
utero iodine on cognition and human capital: treated children attain
an estimated 0.35-0.56 years of additional schooling relative to siblings
and older and younger peers. Furthermore, the effect appears
to be substantially larger for girls, consistent with laboratory evidence
indicating greater cognitive sensitivity of female fetuses to
maternal thyroid deprivation. (JEL I12, I21, J16, O15)</ab>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/app.1.4.140</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/app.1.4.140</doi>
<dataset>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/data/2008-0158_data.zip</dataset>
<addt_matl_link>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/app/2008-0158_app.pdf</addtl_matl_link>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>1945-7782</issn>
<issn_online>1945-7790</issn_online>
<jrnti>American Economic Journal: Applied Economics</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej-applied/</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>1</vol>
<iss>4</iss>
<cd>October 2009</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/issue.php?journal=APP&volume=1&issue=4</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Journal Article</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>How Large Are Non-Budget-Constraint Effects of Prices on Demand?</ti>
<augp>
<au><gnm>Ori</gnm><snm>Heffetz</snm><aff>Cornell U</aff></au>
<au><gnm>Moses</gnm><snm>Shayo</snm><aff>Hebrew U Jerusalem</aff></au>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>170</ppf>
<ppl>99</ppl>
</pp>
<ab>Elementary consumer theory assumes prices affect demand only
because they affect the budget constraint (BC). Alternative models,
and some evidence, suggest prices can affect demand through other,
non-BC channels (e.g., by signaling quality). This paper uses a lab
and a field experiment to disentangle BC from non-BC effects of
prices on demand. In the lab, we find that although prices positively
affect stated willingness to pay, non-BC price elasticities are considerably
smaller than BC price elasticities, are often statistically
insignificant, and do not increase with product uncertainty. We do
not detect any non-BC effects in our field experiment. (JEL C93,
D12, M31)</ab>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/app.1.4.170</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/app.1.4.170</doi>
<dataset>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/data/2008-0232_data.zip</dataset>
<addt_matl_link>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/app/2008-0232_app.pdf</addtl_matl_link>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>1945-7782</issn>
<issn_online>1945-7790</issn_online>
<jrnti>American Economic Journal: Applied Economics</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej-applied/</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>1</vol>
<iss>4</iss>
<cd>October 2009</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/issue.php?journal=APP&volume=1&issue=4</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Journal Article</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>In Pursuit of Balance: Randomization in Practice in Development Field Experiments</ti>
<augp>
<au><gnm>Miriam</gnm><snm>Bruhn</snm><aff>World Bank</aff></au>
<au><gnm>David</gnm><snm>McKenzie</snm><aff>World Bank</aff></au>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>200</ppf>
<ppl>232</ppl>
</pp>
<ab>We present new evidence on the randomization methods used in existing
experiments, and new simulations comparing these methods.
We
find that many papers do not describe the randomization in detail,
implying that better reporting is needed. Our simulations suggest
that in samples of 300 or more, the different methods perform similarly.
However, for very persistent outcome variables, and in smaller
samples, pair-wise matching and stratification perform best and
appear to dominate the rerandomization methods commonly used in
practice. The simulations also point to specific recommendations for
which variables to balance on, and for which controls to include in
the ex post analysis. (JEL C83, C93, O12)</ab>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/app.1.4.200</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/app.1.4.200</doi>
<dataset>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/data/2008-0182_data.zip</dataset>
<addt_matl_link>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/app/2008-0182_app.pdf</addtl_matl_link>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>1945-7782</issn>
<issn_online>1945-7790</issn_online>
<jrnti>American Economic Journal: Applied Economics</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/aej-applied/</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>1</vol>
<iss>4</iss>
<cd>October 2009</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/issue.php?journal=APP&volume=1&issue=4</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Journal Article</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>Front Matter</ti>
<augp>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>i</ppf>
<ppl>ii</ppl>
</pp>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/app.1.4.i</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/app.1.4.i</doi>
</artinfo>
</head>


