Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Analysis shows pilot studies support evidence-based decision making in financial regulation, indicating their mixed value.
Financial regulators considering the desirability of a new rule or regulation sometimes use pilot studies for evidence-based decision making. Although pilot studies can generate new knowledge, they also can be expensive and subject to serious selection biases, spillover problems, and the infeasibility of a blind design. Alternatively, regulators can often evaluate a proposed regulation’s impact by analyzing archival data or applying theory based on well-accepted economic principles. We discuss why pilot studies can be useful, but also why regulators and industry participants sometimes favor pilot studies with little scientific value. We illustrate these issues by discussing various SEC pilot studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Harris et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: