CESR Events Archive

Monday, April 27
12pm – 1pm PT
VPD 203 and Zoom

Abstract: Emerging evidence suggests substantial morbidity and mortality following hurricanes, but the mechanisms underlying these impacts remain poorly understood. One potential driver is interruptions to essential health care due to facility closures, lack of accessibility, or displacement. Existing evidence on how hurricanes impact use of essential health care is limited to only a few, very extreme events, which constitute only a small portion of overall exposure. If hurricanes consistently lead to forgone care across the full distribution of event intensity, this would imply broader population health effects and provide actionable insights for mitigation. In this study, we link comprehensive hurricane exposure data for the past two decades with Medicare claims to assess the extent to which Medicare enrollees with end-stage renal disease miss dialysis visits in the weeks and months surrounding hurricane exposure. Using a stacked difference-in-differences event study design, we find that: 1) dialysis visits increase by 0.12 visits in the week prior to a hurricane suggesting anticipation effects, 2) visits decrease by 0.3 per person (a 10% reduction) in the week following the hurricane, with effects persisting for three weeks; and 3) reductions are larger for more intense hurricanes but remain clinically meaningful even at lower intensities. We also find that hurricane-induced missed dialysis visits are associated with increases in emergency department visits and hospitalizations, particularly for conditions related to missed dialysis. Given the strong link between missing dialysis visits and death, interventions to ensure continuity of dialysis care follow hurricanes could save many lives.

Monday, April 20
12pm – 1pm PT
Zoom

Abstract: Over the twentieth century, life expectancy increased substantially, creating the expectation that each successive generation would live both longer and healthier lives. Emerging evidence, however, suggests that this assumption may no longer hold. Research increasingly points to a phenomenon described as the Generational Health Drift, whereby more recent cohorts experience similar, or in some cases worse, health than earlier generations at the same age, despite continuing improvements in longevity.

George will present evidence on this trend using data from international longitudinal population surveys alongside the UK’s national British birth cohort studies. By comparing health trajectories across multiple generations, he will show how changing social, economic and policy environments shape population health over time.

Building on this evidence, George will examine the broader societal implications of the Generational Health Drift, including its potential consequences for labour market participation and future pressures on health and care systems. He will also discuss the need for policies that mitigate its impacts, supporting healthy ageing, sustaining workforce participation and ensuring the sustainability of health systems in the decades ahead.

Bio: George Ploubidis is Professor of Population Health and Statistics at the UCL Social Research Institute, University College London and Director of the National Child Development Study and the 1970 British Cohort Study at the UCL Centre for Longitudinal Studies. His research focuses on the social and demographic determinants of health across the life course and on understanding generational differences in population health and mortality using longitudinal population data. Before joining UCL, he held academic posts at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and the University of Cambridge.

Monday, April 13
12pm – 1pm PT
VPD 203 and Zoom

Abstract: Deliberative democracy advocates argue that deliberation can strengthen democracy in part by reducing partisan hostility and affective polarization. Yet whether and why this holds remains under-examined. This paper demonstrates that deliberation can reduce partisan animus by promoting engagement with out-partisan policy perspectives. This engagement builds cognitive empathy, increasing positive affect and tolerance toward out-partisans. Evidence is from an experiment in Honduras. Deliberators were randomly assigned to defend policies with which they agreed (own perspective) or disagreed (out-partisan perspective). Deliberation reduced affective polarization and out partisan animus. These reductions were concentrated and more persistent in the out-partisan perspective group, while polarization increased modestly in the own-perspective group. The findings demonstrate that engagement with out-partisan policy viewpoints is an important causal mechanism driving deliberation’s impact while also highlighting the potential limits of deliberation and discussion in the absence of active engagement with out-group points of view.

Bio: I am an Associate Professor of Political Science and International Relations at the University of Southern California (USC). My research is motivated by the challenges facing contemporary democracies. I aim to shed light on these challenges and to contribute ideas — rigorously tested with methods attuned to causal inference — about how to foster democratic renewal. This work spans three main areas: clientelism and distributive politics; democratic accountability and renewal; and democracy and the judiciary. I have conducted field research in Benin, Ghana, Kenya, and Malawi, and have recently expanded my comparative focus to include cases in the Americas, including Honduras and the United States. I am the author of Money for Votes: The Causes and Consequences of Electoral Clientelism in Africa (Cambridge University Press, 2018), which received the African Politics Conference Group award for best book. My research has appeared in leading journals such as the American Political Science Review, the American Journal of Political Science, the British Journal of Political Science, Perspectives on Politics, and World Politics, and has been supported by grants from the National Science Foundation and the International Growth Centre. I received my PhD from UCLA and was a postdoctoral fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law at Stanford University. Prior to joining USC, I was on the faculty at George Washington University.

Monday, April 6
12pm – 1pm PT
VPD 203 and Zoom

Abstract: Why do spouses hide income from each other, and why would they pay to reveal it? This paper studies preferences over income privacy within households using a laboratory experiment with low-income urban couples in Kenya that identifies willingness to pay for income hiding (or transparency). We show that a substantial share of spouses are willing to sacrifice income to keep earnings hidden (36% of wives and 26% of husbands). At the same time, we document a previously under-explored phenomenon: a large fraction of spouses are willing to pay to reveal income to their partner (20% of wives and 31% of husbands). Using vignette-based survey experiments, we provide evidence on perceived motives and consequences of hiding and revealing income, including future-oriented investment, hedging against marital dissolution, and sanctions after financial disclosure. Together, these results challenge standard household models and provide a foundation to inform future models of the household. 

Bio: Jessica is an Associate Professor at Colorado College and applied microeconomist who specializes in experimental methods. Previously, she was an Associate Research Fellow at the International Food Policy Research Institute, an Evaluation Coordinator for Innovations for Poverty Action- Kenya, and a Research Assistant at the Federal Reserve Board. She holds a PhD and MA in Economics from the University of Michigan and a BA in Math and Economics from Reed College.

Monday, March 30
12pm – 1pm
VPD 203 and Zoom

Abstract: State medical boards enforce care quality standards by disciplining physicians via publicly disclosed administrative actions. We use a novel dataset of 70,000 state medical board actions in more than 40 states over the years 2008-2023 to report the first estimates of the effect of these disciplinary actions on physician careers. We find that 2.5\% of physicians ever receive a disciplinary action over this time period. We link these actions to administrative records on physician practice settings as well as large-scale medical claims to study how physician practices and labor supply change after discipline.  We use a difference-in-differences research design leveraging variation in treatment timing among ever-disciplined physicians. We first report that many disciplined physicians continue to practice; this is true even for a substantial minority of  those losing their license in a particular state. Disciplined physicians are twice as likely as not-yet-disciplined physicians to begin practicing in a new state. Disciplined physicians who continue to practice supply fewer claims, though are no less likely to have a hospital affiliation or be in solo practice;  they are more likely to work in prison, tribal, or military clinics. By providing the first national evidence on the prevalence, correlates, and consequences of physician discipline, our study informs the optimal scope and design of state oversight.

Bio: Colleen Carey is an Associate Professor in the Department of Economics and the Brooks School of Public Policy at Cornell University. Carey’s research focuses on the economics of markets for health care and health insurance.  She has held Federal service roles at Council of Economic Advisers (Staff Economist, 2011-12) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (Fellow, 2024-25).  Previously, she was a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in Health Policy Research at the University of Michigan and a visiting researcher at Princeton University’s Center for Health and Wellbeing

Monday, March 23
12pm – 1pm
VPD 203 and Zoom

Abstract: To evaluate mutual funds, many investors use mutual fund factsheets, short advertising documents containing product information.  The design of mutual fund factsheets is subject to limited regulation, leading to potential concerns that the design of factsheets may be used to sway how investors perceive funds.  To better understand these product advertisements, we first hand-collect factsheets for all mutual funds.  We use a computer algorithm to examine the content of these factsheets, documenting naturally occurring variation in how mutual fund companies choose to present their funds.  In addition, we conduct an online study in which 452 participants review a randomly selected mutual fund factsheet, from an underlying set of 142.  Each factsheet was reviewed by up to 40 participants.  We find that factsheet design features were associated with perceived mutual fund appeal, over and above standard objective measures of performance (alpha) and risk (beta).  Specifically, funds were rated as more appealing if their factsheets were perceived as being more visually attractive or easier to understand, and when they made key information easier to find.  Additionally, mutual fund appeal was greater when factsheets included a performance table or performance line graph, and omitted information about net expenses.  Most of these factsheet design features were similarly associated with ratings of mutual fund appeal among both experienced and inexperienced investors, with few exceptions.  This project provides insight into how advertisements can affect investor perceptions and provides evidence that standardization of fund factsheet design features may be needed to avoid swaying investors.

Bio: Alicia Chyn is a representative of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), where she supports the agency’s mission to protect investors, promote fair and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation. Her work focuses on advancing regulatory compliance and public trust in the financial system.

Monday, March 9
12pm – 1pm
VPD 203 and Zoom

Abstract: Institutionalized racism stemming from the historical practice of slavery supports persistent racial inequalities in health, advantaging Whites and disadvantaging Black Americans.  We advance the literature by empirically testing the role of migration in spreading this legacy of slavery across the United States.  We begin by estimating county-to-county migration flows for White residents of counties historically dependent on slavery (1880 to 1910).  Newly released data from the Census Tree project allow us to do this at a scale previously unattainable.  We use these migration flows to create a novel proxy of exposure to the institution of slavery that extends beyond the US South.  We employ spatially-informed data analysis techniques to examine the patterning of White migrants from slave-dependent counties; and the relationship between this proxy measure and contemporary county-level Black-White inequality in premature mortality.  Results provide a critical foundation for debates regarding persistent racism, Black-White inequality, and reparations.

Bio: Heather A. O’Connell is an Associate Professor of Sociology at Louisiana State University.  Her research centers on understanding race and the persistence of racial inequality in the United States.  While pursuing this objective, she has given notable attention to the enduring structural consequences of historical institutions, particularly slavery.  She has published on topics related to the legacy of slavery as well as Confederate monuments in journals such as Social Forces, Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, DuBois Review, and Demography.

Monday, February 23
12pm – 1pm
Zoom

Abstract: Psychosocial development interventions often carry implicit cultural assumptions that may conflict with local culture and norms, potentially reducing their effectiveness. Yet, the costs of such cultural incongruence likely vary by context and fade as individuals become familiar with different cultural frames. We study the causal impact of two versions of a psychosocial intervention in a randomized trial with female microfinance members in Vietnam, a setting where different cultural models of agency coexist. Participants received a training emphasizing either independent or interdependent agency, or no training. Both arms improve economic outcomes, and limited heterogeneity by baseline cultural orientation suggests limited costs of cultural incongruence in this setting.

Bio:

Travis J. Lybbert is Professor of Agricultural & Resource Economics at the University of California Davis, Affiliate of J-PAL and the Center for Effective Global Action at UC Berkeley, and Chair of the Standing Panel for Impact Assessment of the CGIAR. He works on topics in applied microeconomics ranging from poverty dynamics, hope and aspirations, and nutrition to digital financial inclusion, agricultural technology adoption, and innovation policy. His collaborations with researchers, students, NGOs, governments, and private firms have addressed questions in a wide range of fields and locations, including India, Haiti, Mexico, Sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, the U.S., and Europe.

Monday, February 9
12pm – 1pm
VPD 203 and Zoom

Monday, February 2
12pm – 1pm
VPD 203 and Zoom

Abstract: We consider a generalized method of moments framework in which a part of the data vector is missing for some units in a completely unrestricted, potentially endogenous way. In this setup, the parameters of interest are usually only partially identified. We characterize the identified set for such parameters using the support function of the convex set of moment predictions consistent with the data. This identified set is sharp, valid for both continuous and discrete data, and straightforward to estimate. We also propose a statistic for testing hypotheses and constructing confidence regions for the true parameter, show that standard nonparametric bootstrap may not be valid, and suggest a fix using the bootstrap for directionally differentiable functionals of Fang and Santos (2019). A set of Monte Carlo simulations demonstrates that both our estimator and the confidence region perform well when samples are moderately large and the data have bounded supports.

Monday, January 26
12pm – 1pm
VPD 203

Abstract:

Background: Family care resources have profound implications for care use among those with functional limitations, especially when coupled with dementia. A better understanding of family availability among those at high risk of dementia is important to predict care transitions at the onset of dementia and subsequent years.

Methods: Using Health and Retirement Study (HRS) data, we developed a holistic measure of family care availability (FCA) for adults 55+ who will have dementia onset within the next two years and have disability. We incorporated multiple family contextual factors, considering presence, disability status, geographic proximity, and working status. We conducted cluster analysis to identify groups based on FCA measures specific to relationship type (spouse, adult child, sibling, grandchild). We then examined variation in FCA across population groups and assessed nursing facility utilization at the onset and over the course of dementia.

Conclusion: The FCA index, a holistic measure of family availability to care, will help identify vulnerable populations lacking family care resources and predict care transitions at the onset and over the course of dementia.

Bio: Dr. HwaJung Choi is an Associate Professor at Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, and Health Management and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Michigan. She is also a Faculty Associate at the Institute for Social Research (ISR), University of Michigan. She was a Fulbright scholar and received Ph.D. in Economics at the University of Michigan.

Dr. Choi is an economist and family demographer whose research focuses on family and community contextual factors and their implications for health and care use among older adults with physical and cognitive limitations. Dr. Choi also examines trends and cross-national differences in health and disability outcomes. She is awarded large research grants from the National Institute on Aging as PI, which support the following studies: to assess the impacts of Covid19 pandemic on care use among adults with dementia (R01AG075002); to examine the implications of residential location for disability and cognitive function outcomes (R01AG080491); to develop and evaluate new measures of family care availability (RF1AG083037). Dr. Choi is a Co-lead of the Research and Education Core at the Michigan Center for Contextual Factors in Alzheimer’s Disease and supports early-career scientists in advancing their research and training on contextual factors related to dementia risk and care.

In its eighth installment, the Current Innovations in Probability-Based Household Internet Panel Research (CIPHER) Conference expands its scope to include artificial intelligence (AI) as a new area of focus. As always, CIPHER builds on a rich legacy of methodological innovation, international collaboration, and emerging data modalities. Bringing together researchers, technologists, and policymakers, this year’s conference will explore how AI can enhance panel design, data quality, respondent engagement, and ethical governance. Join us as we chart the future of probability-based internet panels at the nexus of artificial intelligence and survey science.

Thursday, April 30
9am – 10am Pacific Time
Zoom (See email for Zoom link)

Abtract: Dementia is a prevalent and costly disease, but its effects on individuals and families’ economic outcomes are poorly understood. Existing papers have used the timing of disease diagnosis in an event study framework to estimate the effect of disease onset on work, income and wealth. One limitation of such approach is that dementia is difficult to diagnose and whether and when an individual gets diagnosed is endogenous. In this paper, we take a different route and focus on the genetic risk for dementia. Dementia has a strong genetic basis and we investigate how this genetic risk is related to early, mid, and late-life economic outcomes for individuals and their family members. To do that, we construct a novel data set that merges genetic and survey-based data from the Dutch Lifelines Biobank with dementia diagnosis records, longitudinal tax and health expenditure data from national-level administrative sources. We show that our constructed measure of genetic risk for dementia is predictive of dementia diagnosis from administrative data, but only after age 70, when dementia prevalence begins to increase sharply. Further, genetic risk for dementia is unrelated to socio-economic background in early and mid-life, contrary to what we find if we use dementia diagnosis. Preliminary results indicate that genetic risk for dementia has limited effects on the earnings, income and wealth of affected individuals, but that it has a substantial negative effect on the wealth of offspring. As parents age, offspring of parents in the top tercile of genetic risk see a reduction in wealth of 15% when compared to those with parents in the lower tercile of genetic risk.

Bio: Silvia Helena Barcellos is an Associate Professor of Population Health Sciences and Public Affairs. She is a health economist, and her work aims to understand the interplay between socio-economic status and health across the lifespan, with a focus on the role public policy plays on such relationships. She is currently the PI of an NIA R01 grant on gene-environment interactions in education, cognitive functioning, and dementiarisk. Professor Barcellos is also a Faculty Research Fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER, Cambridge MA) and an International Research Associate at the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS, London UK).

Thursday, April 2
9am – 10am
Zoom (See email for Zoom link)

Bio: Lauren Schmitz is an Associate Professor at the La Follette School of Public Affairs at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She is a health economist with additional graduate and postdoctoral training in human genetics and biodemography. Her research utilizes genomic and epigenomic data from population studies to examine how the social environment interacts with biological processes to influence health, health behaviors, and the aging process. Much of her work in this area uses methods for learning causal effects from observational data to identify policy targets that support quality of life and extend healthspan.

Thursday, March 5
9am – 10am
Zoom (See email for Zoom link)

Thursday, February 5
9am – 10am
Zoom (See email for Zoom link)

Abstract: Cannabis use is one of the most widely used psychoactive drugs worldwide and shows substantial genetic influence. This talk provides an overview of the genetic studies of cannabis use, drawing on evidence from twin studies, early gene-finding efforts, and large-scale genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and secondary analyses of these GWAS results. Twin studies indicate moderate heritability, increasing with more severe use, while recent GWAS have identified multiple associated loci, including CADM2. I will present results from the latest, unpublished GWAS of cannabis use frequency, alongside updated analyses of lifetime use, including trans-ancestry findings. Multivariate and causal genetic analyses reveal substantial shared genetic liability with other substance use and psychiatric disorders.

Bio: Karin Verweij is Professor of Genetics in Psychiatry at Amsterdam UMC (Department of Psychiatry), University of Amsterdam. Her research focuses on the genetic and biological mechanisms underlying psychiatric disorders and human behavior. In particular, she studies substance use and addiction, and the relationship between substance use and psychiatric disorders.

Thursday, January 15
9am – 10am
Zoom (See email for Zoom link)

Abstract: Much is known about how parental resources shape the human capital of children, but far less is known about the role of parental traits and behaviors. Using unique data from the Lifelines Cohort Study linked to administrative records, we study the intergenerational effects of a random increase in parental genetic predisposition for externalizing behavior. There are three main findings. First, a stronger predisposition for externalizing behavior is a strong predictor of hostile behavior, attention deficit disorder, and substance abuse, but is less strongly related to education or income. Second, this predisposition leads to sizeable reductions in the education of the next generation. Third, these intergenerational effects cannot be explained by the genetic endowments of children. Our results thus present a unique case in which intergenerational effects on education exceed the effects on these outcomes in the first generation.

This project is joint work with Sander de Vries

Bio: Sjoerd van Alten is an economist researching the genetic and environmental determinants that shape inequalities in human capital, health, and labor market outcomes. He investigates these topics as a Postdoc Researcher at the School of Business Economics (SBE) at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Additionally, some of his work focuses on the effects of selection bias in large-scale Biobanks that are widely used in medicine, epidemiology, statistical genetics, and the social sciences.

He has authored and published various papers on these topics in outlets such as Nature Communications, Nature Genetics, and Intergenerational Journal of Epidemiology. In 2024, he completed his PhD-thesis “Genetics, Human Capital Formation and the Intergenerational Transmission of Socioeconomic Status” at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and Tinbergen Institute, under supervision of Titus Galama, Maarten Lindeboom, and Kevin Thom (UW-Milwaukee).