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! ]

Average treatment effect estimation via random recursive partitioning

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Giuseppe PORRO ()
Stefano Maria IACUS ()

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

A new matching method is proposed for the estimation of the average treatment effect of social policy interventions (e.g., training programs or health care measures. Given an outcome variable, a treatment and a set of pre-treatment covariates, the method is based on the examination of random recursive partitions of the space of covariates using regression trees. A regression tree is grown either on the treated or on the untreated individuals {\it only} using as response variable a random permutation of the indexes 1,...,n (n being the number of units involved), while the indexes for the other group are predicted using this tree. The procedure is replicated in order to rule out the effect of specific permutations. The average treatment effect is estimated in each tree by matching treated and untreated in the same terminal nodes. The final estimator of the average treatment effect is obtained by averaging on all the trees grown. The method does not require any specific model assumption apart from the tree's complexity, which does not affect the estimator though. We show that this method is either an instrument to check whether two samples can be matched (by any method) and, when this is feasible, to obtain reliable estimates of the average treatment effect. We further propose a graphical tool to inspect the quality of the match.The method has been applied to the National Supported Work Demonstration data, previously analyzed by Lalonde (1986) and others.

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 file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.economia.unimi.it/uploads/wp/wp208.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Department of Economics University of Milan Italy in its series Departemental Working Papers with number 2004-28.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 01 Jan 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:mil:wpdepa:2004-28

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Via Conservatorio 7, I-20122 Milan - Italy
Phone: +39 02 50321522
Fax: +39 02 50321505
Web page: http://www.economia.unimi.it
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Daniele Checchi).

Related research
Keywords: average treatment effect recursive partitioning matching estimators observational studies bias reduction

Find related papers by JEL classification:
C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods
C40 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - General
C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Microeconomic Data

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

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. James Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Jeffrey Smith & Petra Todd, 1998. "Characterizing Selection Bias Using Experimental Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(5), pages 1017-1098, September.
    Other versions:
  2. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 2002. "Propensity Score-Matching Methods For Nonexperimental Causal Studies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(1), pages 151-161, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  3. Jeffrey Smith & Petra Todd, 2003. "Does Matching Overcome Lalonde's Critique of Nonexperimental Estimators?," University of Western Ontario, CIBC Human Capital and Productivity Project Working Papers 20035, University of Western Ontario, CIBC Human Capital and Productivity Project. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  4. Heckman, James J & Ichimura, Hidehiko & Todd, Petra E, 1997. "Matching as an Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 64(4), pages 605-54, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 1998. "Causal Effects in Non-Experimental Studies: Re-Evaluating the Evaluation of Training Programs," NBER Working Papers 6586, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Alberto Abadie & Guido W. Imbens, 2006. "Large Sample Properties of Matching Estimators for Average Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 235-267, 01. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Sascha O. Becker & Andrea Ichino, 2002. "Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 2(4), pages 358-377, November. [Downloadable!]
  8. Dehejia, Rajeev, 2005. "Practical propensity score matching: a reply to Smith and Todd," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 355-364. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Cannot find something on IDEAS? Encourage the publisher to index it! Instructions.

This page was last updated on 2008-7-22.


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.