What is wrong with rerandomization in randomized field experiments?

Abstract Rerandomization is a new technique employed in randomized field experiments (RFEs) to enhance the balance of covariates across experimental groups. Rerandomization is recommended because it reduces imbalances in known covariates, thereby enhancing the precision of the average treatment effect estimates. However, employing rerandomization necessitates adjusting observed p-values, using regression-based inference, and selecting predictive covariates. All these amendments increase the number of researcher degrees of freedom, i.e., methodological decisions involved in designing and analyzing experiments. I argue that this increased analytical flexibility may be misused to p-hack for statistically significant or preferred results, thereby reducing the credibility of the results.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophy of Science
Published
2026-03-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/psa.2026.10203
Primary Topic
Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

What is wrong with rerandomization in randomized field experiments?

Mariusz Maziarz
Philosophy of Science
Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
article

What is wrong with rerandomization in randomized field experiments?

Mariusz Maziarz
article en

Abstract

Abstract Rerandomization is a new technique employed in randomized field experiments (RFEs) to enhance the balance of covariates across experimental groups. Rerandomization is recommended because it reduces imbalances in known covariates, thereby enhancing the precision of the average treatment effect estimates. However, employing rerandomization necessitates adjusting observed p-values, using regression-based inference, and selecting predictive covariates. All these amendments increase the number of researcher degrees of freedom, i.e., methodological decisions involved in designing and analyzing experiments. I argue that this increased analytical flexibility may be misused to p-hack for statistically significant or preferred results, thereby reducing the credibility of the results.

Philosophy of Science
Jagiellonian University (PL)
Universität zu Köln
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 33%
Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.