Cash-like vouchers improve psychological well-being of vulnerable and displaced persons fleeing armed conflict
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The psychological burden of conflict-induced displacement is severe. Currently, there are 80 million displaced persons around the world, and their number is expected to increase in upcoming decades. Yet, few studies have systematically assessed the effectiveness of programs that assist displaced persons, especially in settings of extreme vulnerability. We focus on eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, where myriad local armed conflicts have driven cycles of displacement for over 20 years. We conducted a within-village randomized field experiment with 976 households, across 25 villages, as part of the United Nations' Rapid Response to Population Movements program. The program provided humanitarian relief to over a million people each year, including vouchers for essential nonfood items, such as pots, pans, cloth, and mattresses. The vouchers led to large improvements in psychological well-being: a 0.32 standard deviation unit (SDU) improvement at 6 weeks, and a 0.18 SDU improvement at 1 year. There is no evidence that the program undermined social cohesion within the village, which alleviates worries related to programs that target some community members but not others. Finally, there was no improvement in child health.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".