This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Random Recursive Partitioning: a matching method for the estimation of the average treatment effect

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Giuseppe Porro (Department of Economics and Statistics, University of Trieste, P.le Europa 1, I-34127 Trieste, Italy)
Stefano Maria Iacus (Department of Economics, Business and Statistics, University of Milan, Via Conservatorio 7, I-20122 Milano, Italy)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In this paper we introduce the Random Recursive Partitioning (RRP) matching method. RRP generates a proximity matrix which might be useful in econometric applications like average treatment effect estimation. RRP is a Monte Carlo method that randomly generates non-empty recursive partitions of the data and evaluates the proximity between two observations as the empirical frequency they fall in a same cell of these random partitions over all Monte Carlo replications. From the proximity matrix it is possible to derive both graphical and analytical tools to evaluate the extent of the common support between data sets. The RRP method is “honest” in that it does not match observations “at any cost”: if data sets are separated, the method clearly states it.

The match obtained with RRP is invariant under monotonic transformation of the data. Average treatment effect estimators derived from the proximity matrix seem to be competitive compared to more commonly used estimators. RRP method does not require a particular structure of the data and for this reason it can be applied when distances like Mahalanobis or Euclidean are not suitable, in the presence of missing data or when the estimated propensity score is too sensitive to model specifications. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/jae.1026
File Format: text/html
File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
Download Restriction: no
File URL: http://qed.econ.queensu.ca:80/jae/2009-v24.1/
File Format: text/html
File Function: Supporting data files and programs
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Article provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Journal of Applied Econometrics.

Volume (Year): 24 (2009)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Pages: 163-185
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:jae:japmet:v:24:y:2009:i:1:p:163-185

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.interscience.wiley.com/jpages/0883-7252/

Order Information:
Email:
Web: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/jcatalog/subscribe.jsp?issn=0883-7252

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. James Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Jeffrey Smith & Petra Todd, 1998. "Characterizing Selection Bias Using Experimental Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(5), pages 1017-1098, September.
    Other versions:
  2. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 2002. "Propensity score matching methods for non-experimental causal studies," Discussion Papers 0102-14, Columbia University, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  3. Keisuke Hirano & Guido W. Imbens & Geert Ridder, 2003. "Efficient Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Using the Estimated Propensity Score," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(4), pages 1161-1189, 07. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  4. Heckman, James J & Ichimura, Hidehiko & Todd, Petra E, 1997. "Matching as an Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 64(4), pages 605-54, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  6. Sascha O. Becker & Andrea Ichino, 2002. "Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 2(4), pages 358-377, November. [Downloadable!]
  7. Dehejia, Rajeev, 2005. "Practical propensity score matching: a reply to Smith and Todd," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 355-364. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? IDEAS also indexes books.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-21.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.