  Classical randomized experiments, equipped with randomization-based
inference, provide assumption-free inference for treatment effects. They have
been the gold standard for drawing causal inference and provide excellent
internal validity. However, they have also been criticized for questionable
external validity, in the sense that the conclusion may not generalize well to
a larger population. The randomized survey experiment is a design tool that can
help mitigate this concern, by randomly selecting the experimental units from
the target population of interest. However, as pointed out by Morgan and Rubin
(2012), chance imbalances often exist in covariate distributions between
different treatment groups even under completely randomized experiments. Not
surprisingly, such covariate imbalances also occur in randomized survey
experiments. Furthermore, the covariate imbalances happen not only between
different treatment groups, but also between the sampled experimental units and
the overall population of interest. In this paper, we propose a two-stage
rerandomization design that can actively avoid undesirable covariate imbalances
at both the sampling and treatment assignment stages. We further develop
asymptotic theory for rerandomized survey experiments, demonstrating that
rerandomization provides better covariate balance, more precise treatment
effect estimators, and shorter large-sample confidence intervals. We also
propose covariate adjustment to deal with remaining covariate imbalances after
rerandomization, showing that it can further improve both the sampling and
estimated precision. Our work allows general relationship among covariates at
the sampling, treatment assignment and analysis stages, and generalizes both
rerandomization in classical randomized experiments (Morgan and Rubin 2012) and
rejective sampling in survey sampling (Fuller 2009).
