Testing weak nulls in matched observational studies

We develop sensitivity analyses for the sample average treatment effect in matched observational studies while allowing unit‐level treatment effects to vary. The methods may be applied to studies using any optimal without‐replacement matching algorithm. In contrast to randomized experiments and to paired observational studies, we show for general matched designs that over a large class of test statistics, any procedure bounding the worst‐case expectation while allowing for arbitrary effect heterogeneity must be unnecessarily conservative if treatment effects are actually constant across individuals. We present a sensitivity analysis which bounds the worst‐case expectation while allowing for effect heterogeneity, and illustrate why it is generally conservative if effects are constant. An alternative procedure is presented that is asymptotically sharp if treatment effects are constant, and that is valid for testing the sample average effect under additional restrictions which may be deemed benign by practitioners. Simulations demonstrate that this alternative procedure results in a valid sensitivity analysis for the weak null hypothesis under a host of reasonable data‐generating processes. The procedures allow practitioners to assess robustness of estimated sample average treatment effects to hidden bias while allowing for effect heterogeneity in matched observational studies.