IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/istatr/v93y2025i2p288-316.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Do Applied Researchers Use the Causal Forest? A Methodological Review

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick Rehill

Abstract

This methodological review examines the use of the causal forest method by applied researchers across 133 peer‐reviewed papers. It shows that the emerging best practice relies heavily on the approach and tools created by the original authors of the causal forest such as their grf package and the approaches given by them in examples. Generally, researchers use the causal forest on a relatively low‐dimensional dataset relying on observed controls or in some cases experiments to identify effects. There are several common ways to then communicate results–by mapping out the univariate distribution of individual‐level treatment effect estimates, displaying variable importance results for the forest and graphing the distribution of treatment effects across covariates that are important either for theoretical reasons or because they have high variable importance. Some deviations from this common practice are interesting and deserve further development and use. Others are unnecessary or even harmful. The paper concludes by reflecting on the emerging best practice for causal forest use and paths for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick Rehill, 2025. "How Do Applied Researchers Use the Causal Forest? A Methodological Review," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 93(2), pages 288-316, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:istatr:v:93:y:2025:i:2:p:288-316
    DOI: 10.1111/insr.12610
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/insr.12610
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/insr.12610?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
    ---><---

    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:bla:istatr:v:93:y:2025:i:2:p:288-316. 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://edirc.repec.org/data/isiiinl.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.