IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/amstat/v76y2022i2p159-167.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On Deconfounding Spatial Confounding in Linear Models

Author

Listed:
  • Dale L. Zimmerman
  • Jay M. Ver Hoef

Abstract

Spatial confounding, that is, collinearity between fixed effects and random effects in a spatial generalized linear mixed model, can adversely affect estimates of the fixed effects. Restricted spatial regression methods have been proposed as a remedy for spatial confounding. Such methods replace inference for the fixed effects of the original model with inference for those effects under a model in which the random effects are restricted to a subspace orthogonal to the column space of the fixed effects model matrix; thus, they “deconfound” the two types of effects. We prove, however, that frequentist inference for the fixed effects of a deconfounded linear model is generally inferior to that for the fixed effects of the original spatial linear model; in fact, it is even inferior to inference for the corresponding nonspatial model. We show further that deconfounding also leads to inferior predictive inferences, though its impact on prediction appears to be relatively small in practice. Based on these results, we argue that deconfounding a spatial linear model is bad statistical practice and should be avoided.

Suggested Citation

  • Dale L. Zimmerman & Jay M. Ver Hoef, 2022. "On Deconfounding Spatial Confounding in Linear Models," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(2), pages 159-167, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:amstat:v:76:y:2022:i:2:p:159-167
    DOI: 10.1080/00031305.2021.1946149
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00031305.2021.1946149
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00031305.2021.1946149?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:amstat:v:76:y:2022:i:2:p:159-167. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/UTAS20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.