IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/pkyue.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Treatment for natural experiments: How to improve causal estimates using conceptual definitions and substantive interpretations

Author

Listed:
  • Öberg, Stefan

Abstract

The local average treatment effect (LATE) estimator has enabled a wide range of empirical studies using natural experiments to estimate causal effects from observational data. This empirical literature has overlooked a crucial assumption regarding the definition of the treatment—a part of the stable unit treatment value assumption called the consistency assumption in epidemiology. The consequence of ignoring this assumption has been that results have been misinterpreted and over-generalized. I illustrate these problems using examples from seminal studies of the natural experiments literature and present how to improve definitions in future studies. Correctly interpreted LATEs are much more specific than previously acknowledged but reclaim their internal validity. By providing clear and careful definitions of the treatment and interpretations of the results, future studies will increase their usefulness by presenting the causal effect that is actually estimated.

Suggested Citation

  • Öberg, Stefan, 2021. "Treatment for natural experiments: How to improve causal estimates using conceptual definitions and substantive interpretations," SocArXiv pkyue, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:pkyue
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/pkyue
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6093e4d95533b4046de23832/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/pkyue?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guido W. Imbens, 2020. "Potential Outcome and Directed Acyclic Graph Approaches to Causality: Relevance for Empirical Practice in Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(4), pages 1129-1179, December.
    2. Angus Deaton, 2010. "Instruments, Randomization, and Learning about Development," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(2), pages 424-455, June.
    3. Joshua D. Angrist & Alan B. Krueger, 2001. "Instrumental Variables and the Search for Identification: From Supply and Demand to Natural Experiments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 69-85, Fall.
    4. Huber Martin & Wüthrich Kaspar, 2019. "Local Average and Quantile Treatment Effects Under Endogeneity: A Review," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-27, January.
    5. Hui Ren Tan, 2019. "More Is Less?: The Impact of Family Size on Education Outcomes in the United States, 1850–1940," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 54(4), pages 1154-1181.
    6. Angrist, Joshua D, 1990. "Lifetime Earnings and the Vietnam Era Draft Lottery: Evidence from Social Security Administrative Records," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 313-336, June.
    7. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2010. "The Credibility Revolution in Empirical Economics: How Better Research Design Is Taking the Con out of Econometrics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(2), pages 3-30, Spring.
    8. Imbens, Guido W & Angrist, Joshua D, 1994. "Identification and Estimation of Local Average Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(2), pages 467-475, March.
    9. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2017. "Undergraduate Econometrics Instruction: Through Our Classes, Darkly," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 125-144, Spring.
    10. Angrist, Joshua D & Evans, William N, 1998. "Children and Their Parents' Labor Supply: Evidence from Exogenous Variation in Family Size," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(3), pages 450-477, June.
    11. Jacob Westfall & Tal Yarkoni, 2016. "Statistically Controlling for Confounding Constructs Is Harder than You Think," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-22, March.
    12. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    13. Arthur Lewbel, 2019. "The Identification Zoo: Meanings of Identification in Econometrics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 57(4), pages 835-903, December.
    14. Susanne M. Schennach, 2016. "Recent Advances in the Measurement Error Literature," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 341-377, October.
    15. Öberg, Stefan, 2018. "Instrumental variables based on twin births are by definition not valid," Göteborg Papers in Economic History 23, University of Gothenburg, Unit for Economic History.
    16. Joshua D. Angrist & Victor Lavy & Analia Schlosser, 2005. "New Evidence on the Causal Link Between the Quantity and Quality of Children," NBER Working Papers 11835, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Joshua Angrist & Victor Lavy & Analia Schlosser, 2010. "Multiple Experiments for the Causal Link between the Quantity and Quality of Children," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(4), pages 773-824, October.
    18. Öberg, Stefan, 2018. "Instrumental variables based on twin births are by definition not valid (v.3.0)," SocArXiv zux9s, Center for Open Science.
    19. Angrist, Joshua D, 1990. "Lifetime Earnings and the Vietnam Era Draft Lottery: Evidence from Social Security Administrative Records: Errata," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1284-1286, December.
    20. Joshua Angrist & Alan Krueger, 2001. "Instrumental Variables and the Search for Identification: From Supply and Demand to Natural Experiments," Working Papers 834, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    21. Imbens,Guido W. & Rubin,Donald B., 2015. "Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885881.
    22. Edward Vytlacil, 2002. "Independence, Monotonicity, and Latent Index Models: An Equivalence Result," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(1), pages 331-341, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Joshua D. Angrist, 2022. "Empirical Strategies in Economics: Illuminating the Path From Cause to Effect," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(6), pages 2509-2539, November.
    2. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2021. "Answering causal questions using observational data," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2021-2, Nobel Prize Committee.
    3. Öberg, Stefan, 2018. "Instrumental variables based on twin births are by definition not valid (v.3.0)," SocArXiv zux9s, Center for Open Science.
    4. Guido W. Imbens, 2022. "Causality in Econometrics: Choice vs Chance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(6), pages 2541-2566, November.
    5. Eva Deuchert & Martin Huber, 2017. "A Cautionary Tale About Control Variables in IV Estimation," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 79(3), pages 411-425, June.
    6. Peter Hull & Michal Kolesár & Christopher Walters, 2022. "Labor by design: contributions of David Card, Joshua Angrist, and Guido Imbens," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 124(3), pages 603-645, July.
    7. Guido W. Imbens, 2020. "Potential Outcome and Directed Acyclic Graph Approaches to Causality: Relevance for Empirical Practice in Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(4), pages 1129-1179, December.
    8. Rocio Titiunik, 2020. "Natural Experiments," Papers 2002.00202, arXiv.org.
    9. Huber Martin & Wüthrich Kaspar, 2019. "Local Average and Quantile Treatment Effects Under Endogeneity: A Review," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-27, January.
    10. Timothy F. Harris & Aaron Yelowitz, 2018. "Life Insurance Holdings And Well‐Being Of Surviving Spouses," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(3), pages 526-538, July.
    11. Manuel Denzer, 2019. "Estimating Causal Effects in Binary Response Models with Binary Endogenous Explanatory Variables - A Comparison of Possible Estimators," Working Papers 1916, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    12. Denis Fougère & Nicolas Jacquemet, 2020. "Policy Evaluation Using Causal Inference Methods," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03455978, HAL.
    13. Imbens, Guido W., 2014. "Instrumental Variables: An Econometrician's Perspective," IZA Discussion Papers 8048, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Susan Athey & Julie Tibshirani & Stefan Wager, 2016. "Generalized Random Forests," Papers 1610.01271, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2018.
    15. Kugler Franziska & Schwerdt Guido & Wößmann Ludger, 2014. "Ökonometrische Methoden zur Evaluierung kausaler Effekte der Wirtschaftspolitik," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 15(2), pages 105-132, June.
    16. Parrotta, Pierpaolo & Pozzoli, Dario & Sala, Davide, 2016. "Ethnic diversity and firms' export behavior," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 248-263.
    17. Foster, E. Michael & McCombs-Thornton, Kimberly, 2013. "Child welfare and the challenge of causal inference," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 1130-1142.
    18. Masakure, Oliver, 2016. "The effect of employee loyalty on wages," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 274-298.
    19. Phillip Heiler, 2020. "Efficient Covariate Balancing for the Local Average Treatment Effect," Papers 2007.04346, arXiv.org.
    20. Paul Hunermund & Elias Bareinboim, 2019. "Causal Inference and Data Fusion in Econometrics," Papers 1912.09104, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osf:socarx:pkyue. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.