@seyeabimbola “It worked, because it helped employers realise their staff are human too.” One could say this cringeworthy experiment actually dehumanises DWs further and is sadly designed to maintain the status quo.

@seyeabimbola “A simple intervention can protect migrant workers without requiring destination country policy reforms” 🤢🤯

@seyeabimbola I’m actually speechless. This study was conceived, approved and published? And the researchers are proud of this work? 😔

@seyeabimbola A case of investigator's methodological preference bias. The #RCT movement in #economics is going crazy. @NobelPrize is not awarded for methods but fundamental contribution & methods.

@seyeabimbola Systemic changes are needed to address DW mistreatment and abuse problems, but we know such changes take time. In the interim, can we not have "simple interventions" that can possibly help protect millions of DWs from abuse?

@seyeabimbola What’s wrong w it?

@seyeabimbola Tacitly blaming the victims. Same way rape victims are encouraged to 'dress well' to avoid being raped. Sad.

@seyeabimbola Diminishing returns set in a while ago, now for RCTs returns are negative.

@seyeabimbola A pack of dried mangoes 🥭 to break all ice, all barriers. Whew 😰 !

@seyeabimbola I’m not sure I’d grace this with the term “knowledge production”

@seyeabimbola I don’t even have the words Just Ugh 😩 “We partnered” No, they used people and were complicit in the mistreatment of vulnerable women

@seyeabimbola @UMich

@seyeabimbola It seems the opportunity cost of not doing the experiment is worse (people will work either way)... Would you similarly claim that an RCT designed to assist those in poverty by providing them with money to cover extortionate taxes is unethical? What's the (realistic) alternative?