<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Ingrid Huitfeldt | Macro Paper Warehouse</title><link>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/authors/ingrid-huitfeldt/</link><description>Ingrid Huitfeldt</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en-us</language><atom:link href="https://macropaperwarehouse.com/authors/ingrid-huitfeldt/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Designing Dynamic Reassignment Mechanisms: Evidence from GP Allocation</title><link>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/papers/designing-dynamic-reassignment-mechanisms-evidence-from-gp-allocation/</link><guid>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/papers/designing-dynamic-reassignment-mechanisms-evidence-from-gp-allocation/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;This paper studies the design of dynamic reassignment mechanisms—centralized systems that must not only provide good initial matches but also accommodate changes in agents&amp;rsquo; preferences over time. The empirical setting is Norway&amp;rsquo;s system for allocating patients to general practitioners (GPs), where every individual is assigned a specific GP whose panel has a binding capacity cap. Since 2016, Norway has allowed patients to join waitlists for oversubscribed GPs while retaining their spot on their current GP&amp;rsquo;s panel, with reassignment proceeding strictly first-come, first-served (FCFS) as vacancies arise.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Selection in Surveys: Using Randomized Incentives to Detect and Account for Nonresponse Bias</title><link>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/papers/selection-in-surveys-using-randomized-incentives-to-detect-and-account-for-nonresponse-bias/</link><guid>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/papers/selection-in-surveys-using-randomized-incentives-to-detect-and-account-for-nonresponse-bias/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;This paper addresses nonresponse bias in surveys — the distortion that arises when survey participants differ systematically from nonparticipants in ways that correlate with the survey&amp;rsquo;s outcomes of interest. The authors develop and apply methods to detect and correct for nonresponse bias using randomized financial incentives embedded in the survey design itself.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The empirical application is the &amp;ldquo;Norge i Koronatid&amp;rdquo; (NiK) survey, conducted by Statistics Norway in April–May 2020 to study the immediate labor market consequences of Norway&amp;rsquo;s COVID-19 lockdown. The NiK survey has two features that make it unusually well-suited for studying nonresponse bias: (1) it is linked to full-population administrative data, providing a verifiable ground truth for the entire Norwegian adult population; and (2) survey invitees were randomly assigned to one of five financial incentive levels (0%, 1%, 5%, 7%, or 10% probability of receiving a 1,000 NOK prepaid card), generating exogenous variation in participation rates. The final sample of 10,000 randomly drawn adults achieved a 47.4% participation rate.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>