Matching and Weighting Methods for Causal Inference
|
|
- Daniela Young
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Matching and Weighting Methods for ausal Inference Kosuke Imai Princeton University Methods Workshop, Duke University Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) / 57
2 References to Relevant Papers Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric ausal Inference. Political Analysis (27) Misunderstandings among Experimentalists and Observationalists about ausal Inference. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A (28) he Essential Role of Pair Matching in luster-randomized Experiments, with Application to the Mexican Universal Health Insurance Evaluation. Statistical Science (29) ovariate Balancing Propensity Score. Working paper On the Use of Linear Fixed Effects Regression Models for ausal Inference. Working paper All papers are available at Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 2 / 57
3 Software Implementation ausal inference with regression: Zelig: Everyone s Statistical Software ausal inference with matching: MatchIt: Nonparametric Preprocessing for Parametric ausal Inference ausal inference with propensity score: BPS: ovariate Balancing Propensity Score ausal inference with fixed effects: wfe: Weighted Fixed Effects Regressions for ausal Inference All software is available at Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 3 / 57
4 Matching and Weighting What is matching? Grouping observations based on their observed characteristics pairing 2 subclassification 3 subsetting What is weighting? Replicating observations based on their observed characteristics All types of matching are special cases with discrete weights What matching and weighting methods can do: flexible and robust causal modeling under selection on observables What they cannot do: eliminate bias due to unobserved confounding Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 4 / 57
5 Matching for Randomized Experiments Matching can be used for randomized experiments too! Randomization of treatment unbiased estimates Improving efficiency reducing variance Why care about efficiency? You care about your results! Randomized matched-pair design Randomized block design Intuition: estimation uncertainty comes from pre-treatment differences between treatment and control groups Mantra (Box, Hunter, and Hunter): Block what you can and randomize what you cannot Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 5 / 57
6 luster Randomized Experiments Units: i =, 2,..., n j lusters of units: j =, 2,..., m reatment at cluster level: j {, } Outcome: Y ij = Y ij ( j ) Random assignment: (Y ij (), Y ij ()) j Estimands at unit level: SAE m j= n j n m j (Y ij () Y ij ()) j= i= PAE E(Y ij () Y ij ()) Random sampling of clusters and units Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 6 / 57
7 Merits and Limitations of REs Interference between units within a cluster is allowed Assumption: No interference between units of different clusters Often easier to implement: Mexican health insurance experiment Opportunity to estimate the spill-over effects D. W. Nickerson. Spill-over effect of get-out-the-vote canvassing within household (APSR, 28) Limitations: A large number of possible treatment assignments 2 Loss of statistical power Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 7 / 57
8 Design-Based Inference For simplicity, assume equal cluster size, i.e., n j = n for all j he difference-in-means estimator: ˆτ m j Y j m m j= m j= ( j )Y j where Y j n j i= Y ij/n j Easy to show E(ˆτ O) = SAE and thus E(ˆτ) = PAE Exact population variance: Var(ˆτ) = Var(Y j()) m Intracluster correlation coefficient ρ t : + Var(Y j()) m Var(Y j (t)) = σ2 t n { + (n )ρ t} σ 2 t Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 8 / 57
9 luster Standard Error luster robust sandwich variance estimator: Var((ˆα, m m m ˆβ) ) = X j ˆɛ jˆɛ j X j j= X j j= X j where in this case X j = [ j ] is an n j 2 matrix and ˆɛ j = (ˆɛ j,..., ˆɛ nj j) is a column vector of length n j Design-based evaluation (assume n j = n for all j): ( V(Yj ()) Finite Sample Bias = m 2 + V(Y ) j()) m 2 Bias vanishes asymptotically as m with n fixed j= X j Implication: cluster standard errors by the unit of treatment assignment Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 9 / 57 X j
10 Example: Seguro Popular de Salud (SPS) Evaluation of the Mexican universal health insurance program Aim: provide social protection in health to the 5 million uninsured Mexicans A key goal: reduce out-of-pocket health expenditures Sounds obvious but not easy to achieve in developing countries Individuals must affiliate in order to receive SPS services health clusters non-randomly chosen for evaluation Matched-pair design: based on population, socio-demographics, poverty, education, health infrastructure etc. reatment clusters : encouragement for people to affiliate Data: aggregate characteristics, surveys of 32, individuals Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) / 57
11 Matching and Blocking for Randomized Experiments Okay, but how should I match/block without the treatment group? Goal: match/block well on powerful predictors of outcome (prognostic factors) (oarsened) Exact matching Matching based on a similarity measure: Mahalanobis distance = (X i X j ) Σ (X i X j ) ould combine the two Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) / 57
12 Relative Efficiency of Matched-Pair Design (MPD) ompare with completely-randomized design Greater (positive) correlation within pair greater efficiency PAE: MPD is between.8 and 38.3 times more efficient! Relative Efficiency, PAE Relative Efficiency, UAE Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 2 / 57
13 hallenges of Observational Studies Randomized experiments vs. Observational studies radeoff between internal and external validity Endogeneity: selection bias Generalizability: sample selection, Hawthorne effects, realism Statistical methods cannot replace good research design Designing observational studies Natural experiments (haphazard treatment assignment) Examples: birthdays, weather, close elections, arbitrary administrative rules and boundaries Replicating randomized experiments Key Questions: Where are the counterfactuals coming from? 2 Is it a credible comparison? Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 3 / 57
14 Identification of the Average reatment Effect Assumption : Overlap (i.e., no extrapolation) < Pr( i = X i = x) < for any x X Assumption 2: Ignorability (exogeneity, unconfoundedness, no omitted variable, selection on observables, etc.) {Y i (), Y i ()} i X i = x for any x X onditional expectation function: µ(t, x) = E(Y i (t) i = t, X i = x) Regression-based estimator: ˆτ = n n {ˆµ(, X i ) ˆµ(, X i )} i= Delta method is pain, but simulation is easy via Zelig Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 4 / 57
15 Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing READING: Ho et al. Political Analysis (27) Assume exogeneity holds: matching does NO solve endogeneity Need to model E(Y i i, X i ) Parametric regression functional-form/distributional assumptions = model dependence Non-parametric regression = curse of dimensionality Preprocess the data so that treatment and control groups are similar to each other w.r.t. the observed pre-treatment covariates Goal of matching: achieve balance = independence between and X Replicate randomized treatment w.r.t. observed covariates Reduced model dependence: minimal role of statistical modeling Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 5 / 57
16 Sensitivity Analysis onsider a simple pair-matching of treated and control units Assumption: treatment assignment is random Difference-in-means estimator Question: How large a departure from the key (untestable) assumption must occur for the conclusions to no longer hold? Rosenbaum s sensitivity analysis: for any pair j, Γ Pr( j = )/ Pr( j = ) Pr( 2j = )/ Pr( 2j = ) Γ Under ignorability, Γ = for all j How do the results change as you increase Γ? Limitations of sensitivity analysis FURHER READING: P. Rosenbaum. Observational Studies. Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 6 / 57
17 he Role of Propensity Score he probability of receiving the treatment: π(x i ) Pr( i = X i ) he balancing property (no assumption): i X i π(x i ) Exogeneity given the propensity score (under exogeneity given covariates): (Y i (), Y i ()) i π(x i ) Dimension reduction But, true propensity score is unknown: propensity score tautology (more later) Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 7 / 57
18 lassical Matching echniques Exact matching Mahalanobis distance matching: Propensity score matching (X i X j ) Σ (X i X j ) One-to-one, one-to-many, and subclassification Matching with caliper Which matching method to choose? Whatever gives you the best balance! Importance of substantive knowledge: propensity score matching with exact matching on key confounders FURHER READING: Rubin (26). Matched Sampling for ausal Effects (ambridge UP) Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 8 / 57
19 How to heck Balance Success of matching method depends on the resulting balance How should one assess the balance of matched data? Ideally, compare the joint distribution of all covariates for the matched treatment and control groups In practice, this is impossible when X is high-dimensional heck various lower-dimensional summaries; (standardized) mean difference, variance ratio, empirical DF, etc. Frequent use of balance test t test for difference in means for each variable of X other test statistics; e.g., χ 2, F, Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests statistically insignificant test statistics as a justification for the adequacy of the chosen matching method and/or a stopping rule for maximizing balance Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 9 / 57
20 An Illustration of Balance est Fallacy t statistic "Statistical insignificance" region Math test score QQ Plot Mean Deviation Difference in Means Number of ontrols Randomly Dropped Number of ontrols Randomly Dropped Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 2 / 57
21 Problems with Hypothesis ests as Stopping Rules Balance test is a function of both balance and statistical power he more observations dropped, the less power the tests have t-test is affected by factors other than balance, nm (X mt X mc ) s 2 mt r m + s2 mc r m X mt and X mc are the sample means s 2 mt and s 2 mc are the sample variances n m is the total number of remaining observations r m is the ratio of remaining treated units to the total number of remaining observations Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 2 / 57
22 Recent Advances in Matching Methods he main problem of matching: balance checking Skip balance checking all together Specify a balance metric and optimize it Optimal matching: minimize sum of distances Full matching: subclassification with variable strata size Genetic matching: maximize minimum p-value oarsened exact matching: exact match on binned covariates SVM subsetting: find the largest, balanced subset for general treatment regimes Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 22 / 57
23 Inverse Propensity Score Weighting Matching is inefficient because it throws away data Matching is a special case of weighting Weighting by inverse propensity score (Horvitz-hompson): n n i= ( i Y i ˆπ(X i ) ( ) i)y i ˆπ(X i ) Unstable when some weights are extremely small An improved weighting scheme: n i= { iy i /ˆπ(X i )} n i= { i/ˆπ(x i )} n i= {( i)y i /( ˆπ(X i ))} n i= {( i)/( ˆπ(X i ))} Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 23 / 57
24 Weighting Both Groups to Balance ovariates { Balancing condition: E i X i π(x i ) ( i )X i π(x i ) } = AE weighted ontrol units AE weighted reated units Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 24 / 57
25 Weighting ontrol Group to Balance ovariates { } Balancing condition: E i X i π(x i )( i )X i π(x i ) = A weighted ontrol units reated units Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 25 / 57
26 Efficient Doubly-Robust Estimators he estimator by Robins et al. : { n ˆτ DR ˆµ(, X i ) + n n n i= i= { n ˆµ(, X i ) + n n n i= i= } i (Y i ˆµ(, X i )) ˆπ(X i ) ( i )(Y i ˆµ(, X i )) ˆπ(X i ) onsistent if either the propensity score model or the outcome model is correct (Semiparametrically) Efficient FURHER READING: Lunceford and Davidian (24, Stat. in Med.) } Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 26 / 57
27 Marginal Structural Models for Longitudinal Data Units i =,..., N and time j =,..., J Eventual outcome Y i measured at time J reatment and covariate history: ij and X ij Quantity of interest: (marginal) AE = E{Y i ( t)} Sequential ignorability assumption: Y i (t) ij X ij, i,j Inverse-probability-of-treatment weight: w i = P( ij X ij ) = J j= P( ij i,j, X ij ) Stabilized weight: multiply w i by P( ij ) Analysis: weighted regression of Y i on ij FURHER READINGS: Robins et al. (2), Blackwell (23) Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 27 / 57
28 Propensity Score autology Propensity score is unknown Dimension reduction is purely theoretical: must model i given X i Diagnostics: covariate balance checking In practice, adhoc specification searches are conducted Model misspecification is always possible autology: propensity score works only when you get it right! In fact, estimated propensity score works even better than true propensity score when the model is correct heory (Rubin et al.): ellipsoidal covariate distributions = equal percent bias reduction Skewed covariates are common in applied settings Propensity score methods can be sensitive to misspecification Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 28 / 57
29 Kang and Schafer (27, Statistical Science) Simulation study: the deteriorating performance of propensity score weighting methods when the model is misspecified Setup: 4 covariates Xi : all are i.i.d. standard normal Outcome model: linear model Propensity score model: logistic model with linear predictors Misspecification induced by measurement error: X i = exp(xi/2) X i2 = Xi2/( + exp(xi) + ) X i3 = (XiX i3/25 +.6) 3 X i4 = (Xi + Xi4 + 2) 2 Weighting estimators to be evaluated: Horvitz-hompson 2 Inverse-probability weighting with normalized weights 3 Weighted least squares regression 4 Doubly-robust least squares regression Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 29 / 57
30 Weighting Estimators Do Great If the Model is orrect Bias RMSE Sample size Estimator GLM rue GLM rue () Both models correct H n = 2 IPW WLS DR H n = IPW WLS DR (2) Propensity score model correct H n = 2 IPW WLS DR H n = IPW WLS DR Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 3 / 57
31 Weighting Estimators Are Sensitive to Misspecification Bias RMSE Sample size Estimator GLM rue GLM rue (3) Outcome model correct H n = 2 IPW WLS DR H n = IPW WLS DR (4) Both models incorrect H n = 2 IPW WLS DR H n = IPW WLS DR Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 3 / 57
32 ovariate Balancing Propensity Score Recall the dual characteristics of propensity score onditional probability of treatment assignment 2 ovariate balancing score Implied moment conditions: Score equation: { i π β E (X i) ( i)π β (X } i) π β (X i ) π β (X i ) = 2 Balancing condition: { } i Xi E π β (X i ) ( i) X i π β (X i ) = where X i = f (X i ) is any vector-valued function Score condition is a particular covariate balancing condition! Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 32 / 57
33 Estimation and Inference Just-identified BPS: Find the values of model parameters that satisfy covariate balancing conditions in the sample Method of moments: # of parameters = # of balancing conditions Over-identified BPS: # of parameters < # of balancing conditions Generalized method of moments (GMM): ˆβ = argmin β Θ ḡ β (, X) Σ β ḡβ(, X) where ḡ β (, X) = N N i= i π β (X i ) π β (X i ) ( i )π β (X i ) π β (X i ) i Xi π β (X i ) ( i ) X i π β (X i ) and Σ β is the covariance of moment conditions Enables misspecification test Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 33 / 57
34 Revisiting Kang and Schafer (27) Bias RMSE Sample size Estimator GLM BPS BPS2 rue GLM BPS BPS2 rue () Both models correct H n = 2 IPW WLS DR H n = IPW WLS DR (2) Propensity score model correct H n = 2 IPW WLS DR H n = IPW WLS DR Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 34 / 57
35 BPS Makes Weighting Methods More Robust Bias RMSE Sample size Estimator GLM BPS BPS2 rue GLM BPS BPS2 rue (3) Outcome model correct H n = 2 IPW WLS DR H n = IPW WLS DR (4) Both models incorrect H n = 2 IPW WLS DR H n = IPW WLS DR Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 35 / 57
36 BPS Sacrifices Likelihood for Better Balance GLM BPS Log Likelihood GLM BPS ovariate Imbalance GLM BPS GLM BPS Log Likelihood (GLM BPS) Log Imbalance (GLM BPS) Likelihood Balance radeoff Log Likelihood (GLM BPS) Log Imbalance (GLM BPS) Neither Model Both Models Specified orrectly Specified orrectly Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 36 / 57
37 A lose Look at Fixed Effects Regression Fixed effects models are a primary workhorse for causal inference Used for stratified experimental and observational data Also used to adjust for unobservables in observational studies: Good instruments are hard to find..., so we d like to have other tools to deal with unobserved confounders. his chapter considers... strategies that use data with a time or cohort dimension to control for unobserved but fixed omitted variables (Angrist & Pischke, Mostly Harmless Econometrics) fixed effects regression can scarcely be faulted for being the bearer of bad tidings (Green et al., Dirty Pool) ommon claim: Fixed effects models are superior to matching estimators because the latter can only adjust for observables Question: What are the exact causal assumptions underlying fixed effects regression models? Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 37 / 57
38 Matching and Regression in ross-section Settings Units reatment status Outcome Y Y 2 Y 3 Y 4 Y 5 Estimating the Average reatment Effect (AE) via matching: Y 2 (Y 3 + Y 4 ) Y 2 2 (Y 3 + Y 4 ) 3 (Y + Y 2 + Y 5 ) Y 3 3 (Y + Y 2 + Y 5 ) Y 4 Y 5 2 (Y 3 + Y 4 ) Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 38 / 57
39 Matching Representation of Simple Regression ross-section simple linear regression model: Y i = α + βx i + ɛ i Binary treatment: X i {, } Equivalent matching estimator: where Ŷ i () = Ŷ i () = ˆβ = N N (Ŷi Ŷi()) () i= { Y i if X i = N N i = X i i = X i Y i if X i = { N N i = ( X i ) i = ( X i )Y i if X i = Y i if X i = reated units matched with the average of non-treated units Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 39 / 57
40 One-Way Fixed Effects Regression Simple (one-way) FE model: Y it = α i + βx it + ɛ it ommonly used by applied researchers: Stratified randomized experiments (Duflo et al. 27) Stratification and matching in observational studies Panel data, both experimental and observational ˆβ FE may be biased for the AE even if X it is exogenous within each unit It converges to the weighted average of conditional AEs: where σ 2 i ˆβ FE = t= (X it X i ) 2 / p E{AE i σi 2 } E(σi 2 ) How are counterfactual outcomes estimated under the FE model? Unit fixed effects = within-unit comparison Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 4 / 57
41 Mismatches in One-Way Fixed Effects Model ime periods Units : treated observations : control observations ircles: Proper matches riangles: Mismatches = attenuation bias Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 4 / 57
42 Matching Representation of Fixed Effects Regression Proposition Ŷ it (x) = K = ˆβ FE = K { N { N Y it t t Y it N X it i= t= N i= t= if X it = x if X it = x ) } (Ŷit () Ŷit(), for x =, ( X it ) + ( X it ) t t t t X it. K : average proportion of proper matches across all observations More mismatches = larger adjustment Adjustment is required except very special cases Fixes attenuation bias but this adjustment is not sufficient Fixed effects estimator is a special case of matching estimators Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 42 / 57
43 Unadjusted Matching Estimator ime periods Units onsistent if the treatment is exogenous within each unit Only equal to fixed effects estimator if heterogeneity in either treatment assignment or treatment effect is non-existent Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 43 / 57
44 Unadjusted Matching = Weighted FE Estimator Proposition 2 he unadjusted matching estimator where Ŷ it () = ˆβ M = N N i= Y it if X it = t = X it Y it t = X it if X it = (Ŷit Ŷit()) () t= and Ŷ it () = is equivalent to the weighted fixed effects model (ˆα M, ˆβ M ) = argmin W it (α,β) N i= W it (Y it α i βx it ) 2 t= t = X it if X it =, t = ( X it ) if X it =. t = ( X it )Y it t = ( X it ) if X it = Y it if X it = Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 44 / 57
45 Equal Weights reatment Weights Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 45 / 57
46 Different Weights reatment Weights Any within-unit matching estimator leads to weighted fixed effects regression with particular weights We derive regression weights given any matching estimator for various quantities (AE, A, etc.) Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 46 / 57
47 First Difference = Matching = Weighted One-Way FE Y it = β X it + ɛ it where Y it = Y it Y i,t, X it = X it X i,t reatment Weights Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 47 / 57
48 Mismatches in wo-way FE Model ime periods Y it = α i + γ t + βx it + ɛ it Units riangles: wo kinds of mismatches Same treatment status Neither same unit nor same time Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 48 / 57
49 Mismatches in Weighted wo-way FE Model Units ime periods Some mismatches can be eliminated You can NEVER eliminate them all Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 49 / 57
50 ross Section Analysis = Weighted ime FE Model Average Outcome control group treatment group counterfactual time t time t+ Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 5 / 57
51 First Difference = Weighted Unit FE Model Average Outcome control group treatment group counterfactual time t time t+ Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 5 / 57
52 What about Difference-in-Differences (DiD)? Average Outcome control group treatment group counterfactual time t time t+ Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 52 / 57
53 General DiD = Weighted wo-way (Unit and ime) FE 2 2: standard two-way fixed effects General setting: Multiple time periods, repeated treatments reatment Weights Weights can be negative = the method of moments estimator Fast computation is available Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 53 / 57
54 Effects of GA Membership on International rade ontroversy Rose (24): No effect of GA membership on trade omz et al. (27): Significant effect with non-member participants 2 he central role of fixed effects models: Rose (24): one-way (year) fixed effects for dyadic data omz et al. (27): two-way (year and dyad) fixed effects Rose (25): I follow the profession in placing most confidence in the fixed effects estimators; I have no clear ranking between country-specific and country pair-specific effects. omz et al. (27): We, too, prefer FE estimates over OLS on both theoretical and statistical ground Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 54 / 57
55 Data and Methods Data Data set from omz et al. (27) Effect of GA: countries, and 96,27 (dyad-year) observations Year fixed effects model: standard and weighted ln Y it = α t + βx it + δ Z it + ɛ it X it : Formal membership/participant () Both vs. One, (2) One vs. None, (3) Both vs. One/None Z it : 5 dyad-varying covariates (e.g., log product GDP) Year fixed effects: standard, weighted, and first difference wo-way fixed effects: standard and difference-in-differences Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 55 / 57
56 Empirical Results Year Fixed Effects Dyad Fixed Effects Year and Dyad Fixed Effects omparison Membership Standard Weighted Standard Weighted First Diff. Standard Diff.-in-Diff. Formal (N=96,27) (.3) (.3) (.25) (.23) (.54) (.28) (.33) White s p-value Both vs. Mix Participants (N=96,27) (.34) (.35) (.3) (.29) (.3) (.34) (.28) White s p-value Formal (N=75,84) (.3) (.3) (.25) (.23) (.55) (.28) (.33) White s p-value Both vs. One Participants (N=87,65) (.35) (.36) (.3) (.29) (.3) (.34) (.29) White s p-value Formal (N=9,72) (.53) (.56) (.4) (.4) (.67) (.43) (.378) White s p-value One vs. None Participants (N=7,298) (.72) (.79) (.62) (.58) (.63) (.66) (.85) White s p-value covariates dyad-varying covariates year-varying covariates no covariate able : Estimated Effects of GA on the Logarithm of Bilateral rade based on Various Fixed Effects Models: For models with either year or dyad fixed effects, the Weighted columns present the estimates based on the regression weights given in Proposition 2, which yield the estimated average treatment effects. Other weighted fixed effects estimators, i.e., first differences and difference-in-differences, Kosuke Imai (Princeton) are also presented. Matching Bothand vs. Weighting Mix ( Both Methods vs. One ) represents Duke (January the comparison 8 9, 23) between dyads 56 / 57of
57 oncluding Remarks Matching methods do: make causal assumptions transparent by identifying counterfactuals make regression models robust by reducing model dependence But they cannot solve endogeneity Only good research design can overcome endogeneity Recent advances in matching methods directly optimize balance the same idea applied to propensity score Weighting methods generalize matching methods Sensitive to propensity score model specification Robust estimation of propensity score model Next methodological challenges for causal inference: temporal and spatial dynamics, networks effects Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Matching and Weighting Methods Duke (January 8 9, 23) 57 / 57
On the Use of Linear Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference
On the Use of Linear Fixed Effects Regression Models for ausal Inference Kosuke Imai Department of Politics Princeton University Joint work with In Song Kim Atlantic ausal Inference onference Johns Hopkins
More informationUse of Matching Methods for Causal Inference in Experimental and Observational Studies. This Talk Draws on the Following Papers:
Use of Matching Methods for Causal Inference in Experimental and Observational Studies Kosuke Imai Department of Politics Princeton University April 13, 2009 Kosuke Imai (Princeton University) Matching
More informationWhen Should We Use Linear Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference with Panel Data?
When Should We Use Linear Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference with Panel Data? Kosuke Imai Department of Politics Center for Statistics and Machine Learning Princeton University Joint
More informationCovariate Balancing Propensity Score for General Treatment Regimes
Covariate Balancing Propensity Score for General Treatment Regimes Kosuke Imai Princeton University October 14, 2014 Talk at the Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University Joint work with Christian
More informationWhen Should We Use Linear Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference with Longitudinal Data?
When Should We Use Linear Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference with Longitudinal Data? Kosuke Imai Department of Politics Center for Statistics and Machine Learning Princeton University
More informationWeighting Methods. Harvard University STAT186/GOV2002 CAUSAL INFERENCE. Fall Kosuke Imai
Weighting Methods Kosuke Imai Harvard University STAT186/GOV2002 CAUSAL INFERENCE Fall 2018 Kosuke Imai (Harvard) Weighting Methods Stat186/Gov2002 Fall 2018 1 / 13 Motivation Matching methods for improving
More informationUse of Matching Methods for Causal Inference in Experimental and Observational Studies. This Talk Draws on the Following Papers:
Use of Matching Methods for Causal Inference in Experimental and Observational Studies Kosuke Imai Department of Politics Princeton University April 27, 2007 Kosuke Imai (Princeton University) Matching
More informationWhen Should We Use Linear Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference with Longitudinal Data?
When Should We Use Linear Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference with Longitudinal Data? Kosuke Imai Princeton University Asian Political Methodology Conference University of Sydney Joint
More informationCausal Inference Lecture Notes: Causal Inference with Repeated Measures in Observational Studies
Causal Inference Lecture Notes: Causal Inference with Repeated Measures in Observational Studies Kosuke Imai Department of Politics Princeton University November 13, 2013 So far, we have essentially assumed
More informationHigh Dimensional Propensity Score Estimation via Covariate Balancing
High Dimensional Propensity Score Estimation via Covariate Balancing Kosuke Imai Princeton University Talk at Columbia University May 13, 2017 Joint work with Yang Ning and Sida Peng Kosuke Imai (Princeton)
More informationCausal Inference Lecture Notes: Selection Bias in Observational Studies
Causal Inference Lecture Notes: Selection Bias in Observational Studies Kosuke Imai Department of Politics Princeton University April 7, 2008 So far, we have studied how to analyze randomized experiments.
More informationIntroduction to Statistical Inference
Introduction to Statistical Inference Kosuke Imai Princeton University January 31, 2010 Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Introduction to Statistical Inference January 31, 2010 1 / 21 What is Statistics? Statistics
More informationWhat s New in Econometrics. Lecture 1
What s New in Econometrics Lecture 1 Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Unconfoundedness Guido Imbens NBER Summer Institute, 2007 Outline 1. Introduction 2. Potential Outcomes 3. Estimands and
More informationDiscussion of Papers on the Extensions of Propensity Score
Discussion of Papers on the Extensions of Propensity Score Kosuke Imai Princeton University August 3, 2010 Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Generalized Propensity Score 2010 JSM (Vancouver) 1 / 11 The Theme and
More informationDouble Robustness. Bang and Robins (2005) Kang and Schafer (2007)
Double Robustness Bang and Robins (2005) Kang and Schafer (2007) Set-Up Assume throughout that treatment assignment is ignorable given covariates (similar to assumption that data are missing at random
More informationStratified Randomized Experiments
Stratified Randomized Experiments Kosuke Imai Harvard University STAT186/GOV2002 CAUSAL INFERENCE Fall 2018 Kosuke Imai (Harvard) Stratified Randomized Experiments Stat186/Gov2002 Fall 2018 1 / 13 Blocking
More informationMatching for Causal Inference Without Balance Checking
Matching for ausal Inference Without Balance hecking Gary King Institute for Quantitative Social Science Harvard University joint work with Stefano M. Iacus (Univ. of Milan) and Giuseppe Porro (Univ. of
More informationarxiv: v1 [stat.me] 15 May 2011
Working Paper Propensity Score Analysis with Matching Weights Liang Li, Ph.D. arxiv:1105.2917v1 [stat.me] 15 May 2011 Associate Staff of Biostatistics Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland
More informationPropensity Score Weighting with Multilevel Data
Propensity Score Weighting with Multilevel Data Fan Li Department of Statistical Science Duke University October 25, 2012 Joint work with Alan Zaslavsky and Mary Beth Landrum Introduction In comparative
More informationThe Essential Role of Pair Matching in. Cluster-Randomized Experiments. with Application to the Mexican Universal Health Insurance Evaluation
The Essential Role of Pair Matching in Cluster-Randomized Experiments, with Application to the Mexican Universal Health Insurance Evaluation Kosuke Imai Princeton University Gary King Clayton Nall Harvard
More informationWhen Should We Use Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference with Longitudinal Data?
When Should We Use Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference with Longitudinal Data? Kosuke Imai In Song Kim First Draft: July 1, 2014 This Draft: December 19, 2017 Abstract Many researchers
More informationCombining multiple observational data sources to estimate causal eects
Department of Statistics, North Carolina State University Combining multiple observational data sources to estimate causal eects Shu Yang* syang24@ncsuedu Joint work with Peng Ding UC Berkeley May 23,
More informationPrimal-dual Covariate Balance and Minimal Double Robustness via Entropy Balancing
Primal-dual Covariate Balance and Minimal Double Robustness via (Joint work with Daniel Percival) Department of Statistics, Stanford University JSM, August 9, 2015 Outline 1 2 3 1/18 Setting Rubin s causal
More informationCausal Inference with a Continuous Treatment and Outcome: Alternative Estimators for Parametric Dose-Response Functions
Causal Inference with a Continuous Treatment and Outcome: Alternative Estimators for Parametric Dose-Response Functions Joe Schafer Office of the Associate Director for Research and Methodology U.S. Census
More informationRobust Estimation of Inverse Probability Weights for Marginal Structural Models
Robust Estimation of Inverse Probability Weights for Marginal Structural Models Kosuke IMAI and Marc RATKOVIC Marginal structural models (MSMs) are becoming increasingly popular as a tool for causal inference
More informationPropensity Score Methods for Causal Inference
John Pura BIOS790 October 2, 2015 Causal inference Philosophical problem, statistical solution Important in various disciplines (e.g. Koch s postulates, Bradford Hill criteria, Granger causality) Good
More informationAn Introduction to Causal Analysis on Observational Data using Propensity Scores
An Introduction to Causal Analysis on Observational Data using Propensity Scores Margie Rosenberg*, PhD, FSA Brian Hartman**, PhD, ASA Shannon Lane* *University of Wisconsin Madison **University of Connecticut
More informationAdvanced Quantitative Research Methodology, Lecture Notes: Research Designs for Causal Inference 1
Advanced Quantitative Research Methodology, Lecture Notes: Research Designs for Causal Inference 1 Gary King GaryKing.org April 13, 2014 1 c Copyright 2014 Gary King, All Rights Reserved. Gary King ()
More informationPropensity Score Matching
Methods James H. Steiger Department of Psychology and Human Development Vanderbilt University Regression Modeling, 2009 Methods 1 Introduction 2 3 4 Introduction Why Match? 5 Definition Methods and In
More informationESTIMATION OF TREATMENT EFFECTS VIA MATCHING
ESTIMATION OF TREATMENT EFFECTS VIA MATCHING AAEC 56 INSTRUCTOR: KLAUS MOELTNER Textbooks: R scripts: Wooldridge (00), Ch.; Greene (0), Ch.9; Angrist and Pischke (00), Ch. 3 mod5s3 General Approach The
More informationStatistical Analysis of Randomized Experiments with Nonignorable Missing Binary Outcomes
Statistical Analysis of Randomized Experiments with Nonignorable Missing Binary Outcomes Kosuke Imai Department of Politics Princeton University July 31 2007 Kosuke Imai (Princeton University) Nonignorable
More informationSimple Linear Regression
Simple Linear Regression Kosuke Imai Harvard University STAT186/GOV2002 CAUSAL INFERENCE Fall 2018 Kosuke Imai (Harvard) Simple Linear Regression Stat186/Gov2002 Fall 2018 1 / 18 Linear Regression and
More informationSelection on Observables: Propensity Score Matching.
Selection on Observables: Propensity Score Matching. Department of Economics and Management Irene Brunetti ireneb@ec.unipi.it 24/10/2017 I. Brunetti Labour Economics in an European Perspective 24/10/2017
More informationCausal Mechanisms Short Course Part II:
Causal Mechanisms Short Course Part II: Analyzing Mechanisms with Experimental and Observational Data Teppei Yamamoto Massachusetts Institute of Technology March 24, 2012 Frontiers in the Analysis of Causal
More informationEMERGING MARKETS - Lecture 2: Methodology refresher
EMERGING MARKETS - Lecture 2: Methodology refresher Maria Perrotta April 4, 2013 SITE http://www.hhs.se/site/pages/default.aspx My contact: maria.perrotta@hhs.se Aim of this class There are many different
More informationEstimating the Marginal Odds Ratio in Observational Studies
Estimating the Marginal Odds Ratio in Observational Studies Travis Loux Christiana Drake Department of Statistics University of California, Davis June 20, 2011 Outline The Counterfactual Model Odds Ratios
More informationStatistical Analysis of Causal Mechanisms
Statistical Analysis of Causal Mechanisms Kosuke Imai Princeton University November 17, 2008 Joint work with Luke Keele (Ohio State) and Teppei Yamamoto (Princeton) Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Causal Mechanisms
More informationUnpacking the Black-Box of Causality: Learning about Causal Mechanisms from Experimental and Observational Studies
Unpacking the Black-Box of Causality: Learning about Causal Mechanisms from Experimental and Observational Studies Kosuke Imai Princeton University January 23, 2012 Joint work with L. Keele (Penn State)
More informationStatistical Analysis of Causal Mechanisms
Statistical Analysis of Causal Mechanisms Kosuke Imai Princeton University April 13, 2009 Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Causal Mechanisms April 13, 2009 1 / 26 Papers and Software Collaborators: Luke Keele,
More informationA Sampling of IMPACT Research:
A Sampling of IMPACT Research: Methods for Analysis with Dropout and Identifying Optimal Treatment Regimes Marie Davidian Department of Statistics North Carolina State University http://www.stat.ncsu.edu/
More informationFlexible Estimation of Treatment Effect Parameters
Flexible Estimation of Treatment Effect Parameters Thomas MaCurdy a and Xiaohong Chen b and Han Hong c Introduction Many empirical studies of program evaluations are complicated by the presence of both
More informationWeighting. Homework 2. Regression. Regression. Decisions Matching: Weighting (0) W i. (1) -å l i. )Y i. (1-W i 3/5/2014. (1) = Y i.
Weighting Unconfounded Homework 2 Describe imbalance direction matters STA 320 Design and Analysis of Causal Studies Dr. Kari Lock Morgan and Dr. Fan Li Department of Statistical Science Duke University
More informationCausal Inference with General Treatment Regimes: Generalizing the Propensity Score
Causal Inference with General Treatment Regimes: Generalizing the Propensity Score David van Dyk Department of Statistics, University of California, Irvine vandyk@stat.harvard.edu Joint work with Kosuke
More informationCausal Inference in Observational Studies with Non-Binary Treatments. David A. van Dyk
Causal Inference in Observational Studies with Non-Binary reatments Statistics Section, Imperial College London Joint work with Shandong Zhao and Kosuke Imai Cass Business School, October 2013 Outline
More informationThe propensity score with continuous treatments
7 The propensity score with continuous treatments Keisuke Hirano and Guido W. Imbens 1 7.1 Introduction Much of the work on propensity score analysis has focused on the case in which the treatment is binary.
More informationQuantitative Economics for the Evaluation of the European Policy
Quantitative Economics for the Evaluation of the European Policy Dipartimento di Economia e Management Irene Brunetti Davide Fiaschi Angela Parenti 1 25th of September, 2017 1 ireneb@ec.unipi.it, davide.fiaschi@unipi.it,
More informationPropensity Score Analysis with Hierarchical Data
Propensity Score Analysis with Hierarchical Data Fan Li Alan Zaslavsky Mary Beth Landrum Department of Health Care Policy Harvard Medical School May 19, 2008 Introduction Population-based observational
More informationStatistical Analysis of Causal Mechanisms
Statistical Analysis of Causal Mechanisms Kosuke Imai Luke Keele Dustin Tingley Teppei Yamamoto Princeton University Ohio State University July 25, 2009 Summer Political Methodology Conference Imai, Keele,
More informationUnpacking the Black-Box of Causality: Learning about Causal Mechanisms from Experimental and Observational Studies
Unpacking the Black-Box of Causality: Learning about Causal Mechanisms from Experimental and Observational Studies Kosuke Imai Princeton University February 23, 2012 Joint work with L. Keele (Penn State)
More informationInstrumental Variables
Instrumental Variables Kosuke Imai Harvard University STAT186/GOV2002 CAUSAL INFERENCE Fall 2018 Kosuke Imai (Harvard) Noncompliance in Experiments Stat186/Gov2002 Fall 2018 1 / 18 Instrumental Variables
More informationPROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING. Walter Leite
PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING Walter Leite 1 EXAMPLE Question: Does having a job that provides or subsidizes child care increate the length that working mothers breastfeed their children? Treatment: Working
More informationAchieving Optimal Covariate Balance Under General Treatment Regimes
Achieving Under General Treatment Regimes Marc Ratkovic Princeton University May 24, 2012 Motivation For many questions of interest in the social sciences, experiments are not possible Possible bias in
More informationGov 2002: 5. Matching
Gov 2002: 5. Matching Matthew Blackwell October 1, 2015 Where are we? Where are we going? Discussed randomized experiments, started talking about observational data. Last week: no unmeasured confounders
More informationIdentification and Inference in Causal Mediation Analysis
Identification and Inference in Causal Mediation Analysis Kosuke Imai Luke Keele Teppei Yamamoto Princeton University Ohio State University November 12, 2008 Kosuke Imai (Princeton) Causal Mediation Analysis
More informationGov 2002: 4. Observational Studies and Confounding
Gov 2002: 4. Observational Studies and Confounding Matthew Blackwell September 10, 2015 Where are we? Where are we going? Last two weeks: randomized experiments. From here on: observational studies. What
More informationPropensity-Score Based Methods for Causal Inference in Observational Studies with Fixed Non-Binary Treatments
Propensity-Score Based Methods for Causal Inference in Observational Studies with Fixed Non-Binary reatments Shandong Zhao Department of Statistics, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697 shandonm@uci.edu
More informationPropensity Score Methods for Estimating Causal Effects from Complex Survey Data
Propensity Score Methods for Estimating Causal Effects from Complex Survey Data Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School
More informationRegression Discontinuity Designs
Regression Discontinuity Designs Kosuke Imai Harvard University STAT186/GOV2002 CAUSAL INFERENCE Fall 2018 Kosuke Imai (Harvard) Regression Discontinuity Design Stat186/Gov2002 Fall 2018 1 / 1 Observational
More informationNotes on causal effects
Notes on causal effects Johan A. Elkink March 4, 2013 1 Decomposing bias terms Deriving Eq. 2.12 in Morgan and Winship (2007: 46): { Y1i if T Potential outcome = i = 1 Y 0i if T i = 0 Using shortcut E
More informationApplied Microeconometrics (L5): Panel Data-Basics
Applied Microeconometrics (L5): Panel Data-Basics Nicholas Giannakopoulos University of Patras Department of Economics ngias@upatras.gr November 10, 2015 Nicholas Giannakopoulos (UPatras) MSc Applied Economics
More informationRobustness to Parametric Assumptions in Missing Data Models
Robustness to Parametric Assumptions in Missing Data Models Bryan Graham NYU Keisuke Hirano University of Arizona April 2011 Motivation Motivation We consider the classic missing data problem. In practice
More informationUnpacking the Black-Box: Learning about Causal Mechanisms from Experimental and Observational Studies
Unpacking the Black-Box: Learning about Causal Mechanisms from Experimental and Observational Studies Kosuke Imai Princeton University Joint work with Keele (Ohio State), Tingley (Harvard), Yamamoto (Princeton)
More informationA Theory of Statistical Inference for Matching Methods in Applied Causal Research
A Theory of Statistical Inference for Matching Methods in Applied Causal Research Stefano M. Iacus Gary King Giuseppe Porro April 16, 2015 Abstract Matching methods for causal inference have become a popular
More informationModification and Improvement of Empirical Likelihood for Missing Response Problem
UW Biostatistics Working Paper Series 12-30-2010 Modification and Improvement of Empirical Likelihood for Missing Response Problem Kwun Chuen Gary Chan University of Washington - Seattle Campus, kcgchan@u.washington.edu
More informationStatistical Analysis of List Experiments
Statistical Analysis of List Experiments Graeme Blair Kosuke Imai Princeton University December 17, 2010 Blair and Imai (Princeton) List Experiments Political Methodology Seminar 1 / 32 Motivation Surveys
More informationEconometrics of causal inference. Throughout, we consider the simplest case of a linear outcome equation, and homogeneous
Econometrics of causal inference Throughout, we consider the simplest case of a linear outcome equation, and homogeneous effects: y = βx + ɛ (1) where y is some outcome, x is an explanatory variable, and
More informationNew Developments in Econometrics Lecture 11: Difference-in-Differences Estimation
New Developments in Econometrics Lecture 11: Difference-in-Differences Estimation Jeff Wooldridge Cemmap Lectures, UCL, June 2009 1. The Basic Methodology 2. How Should We View Uncertainty in DD Settings?
More informationData Integration for Big Data Analysis for finite population inference
for Big Data Analysis for finite population inference Jae-kwang Kim ISU January 23, 2018 1 / 36 What is big data? 2 / 36 Data do not speak for themselves Knowledge Reproducibility Information Intepretation
More informationStatistical Models for Causal Analysis
Statistical Models for Causal Analysis Teppei Yamamoto Keio University Introduction to Causal Inference Spring 2016 Three Modes of Statistical Inference 1. Descriptive Inference: summarizing and exploring
More informationFor more information about how to cite these materials visit
Author(s): Kerby Shedden, Ph.D., 2010 License: Unless otherwise noted, this material is made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
More informationA Course in Applied Econometrics Lecture 18: Missing Data. Jeff Wooldridge IRP Lectures, UW Madison, August Linear model with IVs: y i x i u i,
A Course in Applied Econometrics Lecture 18: Missing Data Jeff Wooldridge IRP Lectures, UW Madison, August 2008 1. When Can Missing Data be Ignored? 2. Inverse Probability Weighting 3. Imputation 4. Heckman-Type
More informationApplied Statistics Lecture Notes
Applied Statistics Lecture Notes Kosuke Imai Department of Politics Princeton University February 2, 2008 Making statistical inferences means to learn about what you do not observe, which is called parameters,
More informationExtending causal inferences from a randomized trial to a target population
Extending causal inferences from a randomized trial to a target population Issa Dahabreh Center for Evidence Synthesis in Health, Brown University issa dahabreh@brown.edu January 16, 2019 Issa Dahabreh
More informationUniversity of California, Berkeley
University of California, Berkeley U.C. Berkeley Division of Biostatistics Working Paper Series Year 2015 Paper 334 Targeted Estimation and Inference for the Sample Average Treatment Effect Laura B. Balzer
More informationCausal Inference Basics
Causal Inference Basics Sam Lendle October 09, 2013 Observed data, question, counterfactuals Observed data: n i.i.d copies of baseline covariates W, treatment A {0, 1}, and outcome Y. O i = (W i, A i,
More informationPropensity-Score Based Methods for Causal Inference in Observational Studies with Fixed Non-Binary Treatments
Propensity-Score Based Methods for Causal Inference in Observational Studies with Fixed Non-Binary reatments Shandong Zhao David A. van Dyk Kosuke Imai July 3, 2018 Abstract Propensity score methods are
More informationEconometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data
Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data Jeffrey M. Wooldridge / The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England Contents Preface Acknowledgments xvii xxiii I INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
More informationDifference-in-Differences Methods
Difference-in-Differences Methods Teppei Yamamoto Keio University Introduction to Causal Inference Spring 2016 1 Introduction: A Motivating Example 2 Identification 3 Estimation and Inference 4 Diagnostics
More informationNoncompliance in Randomized Experiments
Noncompliance in Randomized Experiments Kosuke Imai Harvard University STAT186/GOV2002 CAUSAL INFERENCE Fall 2018 Kosuke Imai (Harvard) Noncompliance in Experiments Stat186/Gov2002 Fall 2018 1 / 15 Encouragement
More informationSTATS 200: Introduction to Statistical Inference. Lecture 29: Course review
STATS 200: Introduction to Statistical Inference Lecture 29: Course review Course review We started in Lecture 1 with a fundamental assumption: Data is a realization of a random process. The goal throughout
More informationApplied Econometrics Lecture 1
Lecture 1 1 1 Università di Urbino Università di Urbino PhD Programme in Global Studies Spring 2018 Outline of this module Beyond OLS (very brief sketch) Regression and causality: sources of endogeneity
More informationOUTCOME REGRESSION AND PROPENSITY SCORES (CHAPTER 15) BIOS Outcome regressions and propensity scores
OUTCOME REGRESSION AND PROPENSITY SCORES (CHAPTER 15) BIOS 776 1 15 Outcome regressions and propensity scores Outcome Regression and Propensity Scores ( 15) Outline 15.1 Outcome regression 15.2 Propensity
More informationEmpirical Likelihood Methods for Two-sample Problems with Data Missing-by-Design
1 / 32 Empirical Likelihood Methods for Two-sample Problems with Data Missing-by-Design Changbao Wu Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science University of Waterloo (Joint work with Min Chen and Mary
More informationDynamics in Social Networks and Causality
Web Science & Technologies University of Koblenz Landau, Germany Dynamics in Social Networks and Causality JProf. Dr. University Koblenz Landau GESIS Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences Last Time:
More informationEmpirical approaches in public economics
Empirical approaches in public economics ECON4624 Empirical Public Economics Fall 2016 Gaute Torsvik Outline for today The canonical problem Basic concepts of causal inference Randomized experiments Non-experimental
More informationSince the seminal paper by Rosenbaum and Rubin (1983b) on propensity. Propensity Score Analysis. Concepts and Issues. Chapter 1. Wei Pan Haiyan Bai
Chapter 1 Propensity Score Analysis Concepts and Issues Wei Pan Haiyan Bai Since the seminal paper by Rosenbaum and Rubin (1983b) on propensity score analysis, research using propensity score analysis
More informationPropensity score modelling in observational studies using dimension reduction methods
University of Colorado, Denver From the SelectedWorks of Debashis Ghosh 2011 Propensity score modelling in observational studies using dimension reduction methods Debashis Ghosh, Penn State University
More informationClustering as a Design Problem
Clustering as a Design Problem Alberto Abadie, Susan Athey, Guido Imbens, & Jeffrey Wooldridge Harvard-MIT Econometrics Seminar Cambridge, February 4, 2016 Adjusting standard errors for clustering is common
More informationA Course in Applied Econometrics. Lecture 2 Outline. Estimation of Average Treatment Effects. Under Unconfoundedness, Part II
A Course in Applied Econometrics Lecture Outline Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Unconfoundedness, Part II. Assessing Unconfoundedness (not testable). Overlap. Illustration based on Lalonde
More informationComment: Understanding OR, PS and DR
Statistical Science 2007, Vol. 22, No. 4, 560 568 DOI: 10.1214/07-STS227A Main article DOI: 10.1214/07-STS227 c Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 2007 Comment: Understanding OR, PS and DR Zhiqiang
More informationMatching Methods for Causal Inference with Time-Series Cross-Section Data
Matching Methods for Causal Inference with Time-Series Cross-Section Data Kosuke Imai In Song Kim Erik Wang April 28, 2018 Abstract Matching methods aim to improve the validity of causal inference in observational
More informationEconometrics of Panel Data
Econometrics of Panel Data Jakub Mućk Meeting # 6 Jakub Mućk Econometrics of Panel Data Meeting # 6 1 / 36 Outline 1 The First-Difference (FD) estimator 2 Dynamic panel data models 3 The Anderson and Hsiao
More informationStatistical Analysis of Causal Mechanisms for Randomized Experiments
Statistical Analysis of Causal Mechanisms for Randomized Experiments Kosuke Imai Department of Politics Princeton University November 22, 2008 Graduate Student Conference on Experiments in Interactive
More informationSupporting Information. Controlling the Airwaves: Incumbency Advantage and. Community Radio in Brazil
Supporting Information Controlling the Airwaves: Incumbency Advantage and Community Radio in Brazil Taylor C. Boas F. Daniel Hidalgo May 7, 2011 1 1 Descriptive Statistics Descriptive statistics for the
More informationA Measure of Robustness to Misspecification
A Measure of Robustness to Misspecification Susan Athey Guido W. Imbens December 2014 Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, and NBER. Electronic correspondence: athey@stanford.edu. Graduate
More informationImbens/Wooldridge, IRP Lecture Notes 2, August 08 1
Imbens/Wooldridge, IRP Lecture Notes 2, August 08 IRP Lectures Madison, WI, August 2008 Lecture 2, Monday, Aug 4th, 0.00-.00am Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Unconfoundedness, Part II. Introduction
More informationAGEC 661 Note Fourteen
AGEC 661 Note Fourteen Ximing Wu 1 Selection bias 1.1 Heckman s two-step model Consider the model in Heckman (1979) Y i = X iβ + ε i, D i = I {Z iγ + η i > 0}. For a random sample from the population,
More informationGov 2002: 13. Dynamic Causal Inference
Gov 2002: 13. Dynamic Causal Inference Matthew Blackwell December 19, 2015 1 / 33 1. Time-varying treatments 2. Marginal structural models 2 / 33 1/ Time-varying treatments 3 / 33 Time-varying treatments
More informationVariable selection and machine learning methods in causal inference
Variable selection and machine learning methods in causal inference Debashis Ghosh Department of Biostatistics and Informatics Colorado School of Public Health Joint work with Yeying Zhu, University of
More informationEstimating and Using Propensity Score in Presence of Missing Background Data. An Application to Assess the Impact of Childbearing on Wellbeing
Estimating and Using Propensity Score in Presence of Missing Background Data. An Application to Assess the Impact of Childbearing on Wellbeing Alessandra Mattei Dipartimento di Statistica G. Parenti Università
More information