skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


  • Home
  • Search Results
  • Page 1 of 1

Search for: All records

Creators/Authors contains: "Hull, Peter"

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. ; ; (, American Economic Review)
    We study regressions with multiple treatments and a set of controls that is flexible enough to purge omitted variable bias. We show these regressions generally fail to estimate convex averages of heterogeneous treatment effects—instead, estimates of each treatment’s effect are contaminated by nonconvex averages of the effects of other treatments. We discuss three estimation approaches that avoid such contamination bias, including the targeting of easiest-to-estimate weighted average effects. A reanalysis of nine empirical applications finds economically and statistically meaningful contamination bias in observational studies; contamination bias in experimental studies is more limited due to smaller variability in propensity scores. 
    more » « less
    Free, publicly-accessible full text available December 1, 2025
  2. ; ; (, AEA Papers and Proceedings)
    Algorithmic decision-making can lead to discrimination against legally protected groups, but measuring such discrimination is often hampered by a fundamental selection challenge. We develop new quasi-experimental tools to overcome this challenge and measure algorithmic discrimination in pretrial bail decisions. We show that the selection challenge reduces to the challenge of measuring four moments, which can be estimated by extrapolating quasi-experimental variation across as-good-as-randomly assigned decision-makers. Estimates from New York City show that both a sophisticated machine learning algorithm and a simpler regression model discriminate against Black defendants even though defendant race and ethnicity are not included in the training data. 
    more » « less
    Full Text Available 
  3. ; ; ; (, The Quarterly Journal of Economics)
    Full Text Available 
  4. ; ; ; (, American Economic Review)
    Full Text Available