Revisiting the omitted variables argument: Substantive vs. statistical adequacy
AbstractThe problem of omitted variables is commonly viewed as a statistical misspecification issue which renders the inference concerning the influence of X t on yt 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 yt . The textbook omitted variables argument attempts to assess the seriousness of this unreliability using the sensitivity of the estimator [image omitted] � to the inclusion/exclusion of W t , by tracing that effect to the potential bias/inconsistency of [image omitted] � . 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 InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Taylor and Francis Journals in its journal Journal of Economic Methodology.
Volume (Year): 13 (2006)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/link.asp?target=journal&id=104715
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.:
- Spanos,Aris, 1999. "Probability Theory and Statistical Inference," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521424080, November.
- Spanos, Aris, 1989. "On Rereading Haavelmo: A Retrospective View of Econometric Modeling," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(03), pages 405-429, December.
- 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.
- Spanos, Aris, 1995. "On theory testing in econometrics : Modeling with nonexperimental data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 189-226, May.
- Spanos, Aris, 1990. "The simultaneous-equations model revisited : Statistical adequacy and identification," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1-2), pages 87-105.
- Spanos, Aris, 2010. "Statistical adequacy and the trustworthiness of empirical evidence: Statistical vs. substantive information," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 1436-1452, November.
- Spanos, Aris, 2008. "The 'Pre-Eminence of Theory' versus the 'General-to-Specific' Cointegrated VAR Perspectives in Macro-Econometric Modeling," Economics Discussion Papers 2008-25, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
- 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.
- Spanos, Aris, 2010. "Akaike-type criteria and the reliability of inference: Model selection versus statistical model specification," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 158(2), pages 204-220, October.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.