Obstacles to and Limitations of Social Experiments: 15 False Alarms Obstacles to and Limitations of Social Experiments: 15 False Alarms

of these concerns in this paper and find each of them less objectionable than is widely believed. Among these, we believe reluctance to bear the higher costs of social experiments compared to non-experimental methods to be short-sighted, given that the cost of not knowing a program's impacts-or lack thereof-can be much greater than the costs of finding out. Moreover, an assortment of issues concerning ethics, scientific integrity, and practical feasibility need not stand in the way of expanded use of social experiments by governments and foundation funders seeking to convincingly and accurately measure the impacts of their social policies and programs. 2 Obstacles to and Limitations of Social Experiments: 15 False Alarms When deciding how to allocate limited taxpayer or donor funds for social programs, policy makers and program managers increasingly ask for evidence of effectiveness based on studies that do not raise quibbles over methodology. They want to know the extent to which programs have their intended effects on their target populations based on research that all sides of the policy debate can agree provides credible scientific evidence. If it is true, as Trochim notes, that -Only a few programs should survive in the long run‖ (2009, 28), then it is our contention that decisions on termination, continuation, or expansion should be based on researc