IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v56y2012i1p257-269.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Product and Difference Fallacies for Indirect Effects

Author

Listed:
  • Adam N. Glynn

Abstract

Political scientists often cite the importance of mechanism‐specific causal knowledge, both for its intrinsic scientific value and as a necessity for informed policy. This article explains why two common inferential heuristics for mechanism‐specific (i.e., indirect) effects can provide misleading answers, such as sign reversals and false null results, even when linear regressions provide unbiased estimates of constituent effects. Additionally, this article demonstrates that the inferential difficulties associated with indirect effects can be ameliorated with the use of stratification, interaction terms, and the restriction of inference to subpopulations (e.g., the indirect effect on the treated). However, indirect effects are inherently not identifiable—even when randomized experiments are possible. The methodological discussion is illustrated using a study on the indirect effect of Islamic religious tradition on democracy scores (due to the subordination of women).

Suggested Citation

  • Adam N. Glynn, 2012. "The Product and Difference Fallacies for Indirect Effects," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(1), pages 257-269, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:56:y:2012:i:1:p:257-269
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00543.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00543.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00543.x?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Baldwin Kate & Bhavnani Rikhil R., 2015. "Ancillary Studies of Experiments: Opportunities and Challenges," Journal of Globalization and Development, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 113-146, June.
    2. Federico A. Bugni & Ivan A. Canay & Steve McBride, 2023. "Decomposition and Interpretation of Treatment Effects in Settings with Delayed Outcomes," Papers 2302.11505, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    3. Jiawei Fu, 2024. "Extract Mechanisms from Heterogeneous Effects: Identification Strategy for Mediation Analysis," Papers 2403.04131, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    4. Viviana Celli, 2022. "Causal mediation analysis in economics: Objectives, assumptions, models," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 214-234, February.

    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:wly:amposc:v:56:y:2012:i:1:p:257-269. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    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.