IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/boc/wsug07/18.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Estimating average treatment effects in Stata

Author

Listed:
  • Guido Imbens

    (Harvard University)

Abstract

In this talk, I look at several methods for estimating average effects of a program, treatment, or regime, under unconfoundedness. The setting is one with a binary program. The traditional example in economics is that of a labor market program where some individuals receive training and others do not, and interest is in some measure of the effectiveness of the training. Unconfoundedness, a term coined by Rubin (1990), refers to the case where (nonparametrically) adjusting for differences in a fixed set of covariates removes biases in comparisons between treated and control units, thus allowing for a causal interpretation of those adjusted differences. This is perhaps the most important special case for estimating average treatment effects in practice. Under the specific assumptions we make in this setting, the population-average treatment effect can be estimated at the standard parametric root-N rate without functional form assumptions. A variety of estimators, at first sight quite different, have been proposed for implementing this. The estimators include regression estimators, propensity score based estimators, and matching estimators. Many of these are used in practice, although rarely is this choice motivated by principled arguments. In practice, the differences between the estimators are relatively minor when applied appropriately, although matching in combination with regression is generally more robust and is probably the recommended choice. More important than the choice of estimator are two other issues. Both involve analyses of the data without the outcome variable. First, one should carefully check the extent of the overlap in covariate distributions between the treatment and control groups. Often there is a need for some trimming based on the covariate values if the original sample is not well balanced. Without this, estimates of average treatment effects can be sensitive to the choice of, and small changes in the implementation of, the estimators. In this part of the analysis, the propensity score plays an important role. Second, it is useful to do some assessment of the appropriateness of the unconfoundedness assumption. Although this assumption is not directly testable, its plausibility can often be assessed using lagged values of the outcome as pseudooutcomes. Another issue is variance estimation. For matching estimators bootstrapping, although widely used, has been shown to be invalid. I discuss general methods for estimating the conditional variance that do not involve resampling.

Suggested Citation

  • Guido Imbens, 2007. "Estimating average treatment effects in Stata," West Coast Stata Users' Group Meetings 2007 18, Stata Users Group.
  • Handle: RePEc:boc:wsug07:18
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.org/wcsug2007/stata_07oct_final.pdf
    File Function: presentation slides
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Massimiliano Ferraresi & Gianluca Gucciardi & Leonzio Rizzo, 2017. "Does purchase centralization reduce public expenditure? Evidence from the Italian healthcare system," Working papers 66, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica.
    2. Sajid Anwar & Sizhong Sun, 2015. "Unionisation and Firm Performance in China’s Manufacturing Industries," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 78-102, March.
    3. Fedesarrollo, 2018. "Evaluación de los impactos causados en las regiones productoras de hidrocarburos y minerales con el actual Sistema General de Regalías," Informes de Investigación 17194, Fedesarrollo.
    4. Pingping Wang & Wendong Zhang & Minghao Li & Yijun Han, 2019. "Does Fertilizer Education Program Increase the Technical Efficiency of Chemical Fertilizer Use? Evidence from Wheat Production in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-14, January.
    5. Fedesarrollo, 2018. "Evaluación de los impactos causados en las regiones productoras de hidrocarburos y minerales con el actual Sistema General de Regalías," Informes de Investigación 17258, Fedesarrollo.
    6. Rapoport, Benoît & Thibout, Claire, 2018. "Why do boys and girls make different educational choices? The influence of expected earnings and test scores," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 205-229.
    7. Paul Wabiga & Neil Rankin, 2023. "Foreign acquisition and firm performance in sub‐Saharan Africa: Empirical evidence from Ghana," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 91(2), pages 242-269, June.

    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:boc:wsug07:18. 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: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/stataea.html .

    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.