Eva Vivalt

Those are my three favorite new plots in the revised paper. Follow for more updates as we continue to put out results about this exciting program.

And here is the full paper: evavivalt.com/wp-content/u... 17/17

But you can check out results from different years in the paper. 16/

Most people pointing to the pandemic seem to think effects would be better afterwards.

If anything, during the pandemic the effects on labor supply were more muted. 15/

Also, some people have wondered about whether results were driven by the COVID-19 pandemic. We can't make conclusive statements here, but it's important to note the majority of the negative labor supply effects only materialized late. 14/

Importantly, if the transfer were of a shorter duration or if we had followed participants for a shorter period of time, we might have come to very different conclusions! 13/

As you can see, the results show a clear time trend, with impacts on employment growing over time until near the end of the program, when the gap starts to close. 12/

3) We previously included quarterly regression results, but we obtained some updated administrative data and made some nicer plots. For example, here is an event study plot looking at employment status. 11/

Yes, there are some negative impacts on labor supply and income excluding the transfers. People also do stuff with that money.

This second new figure helps illustrate the overall effects - and what doesn't move. 10/

2) Zooming out a bit, what can we say about the broader effects of cash transfers?

Some people have focused on the negative effects of cash transfers on labor supply. Others have focused on the consumption the transfers have enabled. 9/

In any case, improving people's subjective well-being over the long term is hard. This isn't necessarily a fault of the intervention - it could be something about human nature or subjective well-being measures. 8/

Many experts expected the transfers - which represent 40% of baseline household income - to make a bigger difference. If participants thought similarly, they might be disappointed.

Treated participants may face unexpected challenges as they make life changes. 7/

But there are other things that could explain it.

For example, it's possible that those receiving the transfers are not doing as well in years 2-3 as they expected. 6/

When I saw these results, my first reaction was that we have good data to be able to pick up this pattern. 5/

This might be surprising, but there is a large literature on "hedonic adaptation" and that could be part of what is happening here. People who win the lottery, for example, often revert to baseline levels of happiness.

Many positive shocks only temporarily improve well-being. 4/

Here, we measure subjective well-being in several different ways: a measure of life satisfaction, an index of satisfaction across several domains, and a measure of "affect balance" (SPANE).

All show the same trend. 3/

Previously, we found similar effects on stress and psychological distress (Miller et al. 2024): declines in stress in year 1 that do not persist. 2/

We've updated a paper on the 3-year, $1000/month U.S. guaranteed income study.

New results, in 3 figures: 🧵

1) Subjective well-being significantly improved in the treatment group in year 1, but there were no significant differences between the treatment & control group after that. 1/

Nice quote! One of the reasons for the Social Science Prediction Platform. A few of the cash transfer evaluations (including our own) collected ex ante forecasts there. @sdellavi.bsky.social

I don’t think I have ever publicly criticized any Presidential nominee before.

But E.J. Antoni is completely unqualified to be BLS Commissioner. He is an extreme partisan and does not have any relevant expertise.

He would be a break from decades of nonpartisan technocrats.

Evidence for cash transfers is more positive for children is in LMIC countries. But the "it's just one study" framing here is misleading.

The Impact of Unconditional Cash Transfers on Parenting and Children Founded in 1920, the NBER is a private, non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to conducting economic research and to disseminating research findings among academics, public policy makers, an...

Just a note it's not just them. We see pretty similar mixed results on children for three-year $1000/month transfers in the US, albeit not targeted at new moms:

www.nber.org/papers/w34040

Okay, now that I've used it for some work on forecasting, I have to say this is a fantastic tool! We will be changing some things in our paper as a result. Highly recommended!

Giving a seminar today at the World Bank's Strategic Impact Evaluation Fund, pulling together insights from three papers on the evidence-to-policy pipeline! Excited to engage with this group.

Niche, but did you know there is a TTC shop? This is such a perfect fit for my interests (maps, public transit, puzzles) that I have to share. Probably other transit systems make them, too?

The people I know on Baby's First Years are quite open about their findings, fwiw.

Thanks! We were pretty lucky in having a good experience overall, but there were also places you aren't seeing that were very interested until they heard of the results. (And some places perhaps only interested because of a result....) The media is funny.

Photo of Tom Lehrer

My last living musical hero is still my hero but unfortunately no longer living. RIP to the great, great Mr. Tom Lehrer.

YouTube video by The Tom Lehrer Wisdom Channel Tom Lehrer - We Will All Go Together When We Go

A salute to this man, who brought so much entertainment and camaraderie to so many. 💔 Several generations appreciating his music. www.youtube.com/watch?v=frAE...

I've been working on a new tool, Refine, to make scholars more productive. If you're interested in being among the very first to try the beta, please read on.

Refine leverages the best current AI models to draw your attention to potential errors and clarity issues in research paper drafts.

1/

Small aside: this is the first paper I've worked on with "Certified Random" author ordering. 😀 10/10, would randomize again.

Wonderful to work with this great group of people: Patrick Krause, @elizabethrds.bsky.social @smiller.bsky.social @alexbartik.bsky.social @dbroockman.bsky.social 20/20