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! ]

Revisiting the omitted variables argument: Substantive vs. statistical adequacy

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Aris Spanos
Abstract

The problem of omitted variables is commonly viewed as a statistical misspecification issue which renders the inference concerning the influence of X t on y t unreliable, due to the exclusion of certain relevant factors W t . That is, omitting certain potentially important factors W t may confound the influence of X t on y t . The textbook omitted variables argument attempts to assess the seriousness of this unreliability using the sensitivity of the estimator to the inclusion/exclusion of W t , by tracing that effect to the potential bias/inconsistency of . It is argued that the confounding problem is one of substantive inadequacy in so far as the potential error concerns subject-matter, not statistical, information. Moreover, the textbook argument in terms of the sensitivity of point estimates provides a poor basis for addressing the confounding problem. The paper reframes the omitted variables question into a hypothesis testing problem, supplemented with a post-data evaluation of inference based on severe testing. It is shown that this testing perspective can deal effectively with assessing the problem of confounding raised by the omitted variables argument. The assessment of the confouding effect using hypothesis testing is related to the conditional independence and faithfulness assumptions of graphical causal modeling.

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://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=GT4R58225227112U
File Format: text/html
File Function:
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Publisher Info
Article provided by Taylor and Francis Journals in its journal Journal of Economic Methodology.

Volume (Year): 13 (2006)
Issue (Month): 2 (June)
Pages: 179-218
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:taf:jecmet:v:13:y:2006:i:2:p:179-218

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/link.asp?target=journal&id=104715

Order Information:
Web: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/subscription.html

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

Related research
Keywords: omitted variables; bias/inconsistency; confounding; robustness; sensitivity analysis; misspecification; substantive vs. statistical adequacy; structural vs. statistical models; severe testing;

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. Leamer, Edward E & Leonard, Herman B, 1983. "Reporting the Fragility of Regression Estimates," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 65(2), pages 306-17, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Spanos, Aris, 1995. "On theory testing in econometrics : Modeling with nonexperimental data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 189-226, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Spanos, Aris, 1990. "The simultaneous-equations model revisited : Statistical adequacy and identification," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1-2), pages 87-105. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Aris Spanos, 1995. "On normality and the linear regression model," Econometric Reviews, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 195-203. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, 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. Spanos, Aris, 2009. "The Pre-Eminence of Theory versus the European CVAR Perspective in Macroeconometric Modeling," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, Kiel Institute for the World Economy, vol. 3(10), pages 1-14. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Authors registered on the RePEc Author Service receive monthly emails with details about downloads and abstract views of their works.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-10.


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.