Evaluating Consumer Protection Programs: Part I. Weak But Commonly Used Research Designs

In this two‐part article, current methodological approaches to the evaluation of consumer protection reforms are critically reviewed. In Part I, three quasi‐experimental research designs commonly used to evaluate consumer protection initiatives are examined. It is shown that these designs are inherently incapable of yielding strong conclusions about the effects of a law or regulation. In Part II, which will be published in the next issue, research designs which allow stronger causal inferences about the effects of a reform proposal are reviewed. Implications of the review are then discussed in terms of future public policy and evaluation research in the consumer protection area.