There are a lot of ways that scientific research can be useful to charities. For example, a vaccination charity might design its program based on the design of programs that were shown to be successful at increasing vaccination rates in randomized controlled trials.
This is different from testing one’s own program, which might be impractical for the reasons outlined in this post, but it’s a “second-best” option that should at least make you more likely to run an impactful program.
I think EA tends to use a pretty standard definition of “experts”—people who know a lot about a subject, and have some degree of skill in conducting research that leads them to learn more true information about the world.
There are a lot of ways that scientific research can be useful to charities. For example, a vaccination charity might design its program based on the design of programs that were shown to be successful at increasing vaccination rates in randomized controlled trials.
This is different from testing one’s own program, which might be impractical for the reasons outlined in this post, but it’s a “second-best” option that should at least make you more likely to run an impactful program.
I think EA tends to use a pretty standard definition of “experts”—people who know a lot about a subject, and have some degree of skill in conducting research that leads them to learn more true information about the world.