Implications of Stratified Sampling for Fair Lending Binary Logit Models
We examine the effect of sample design on estimation and inference for disparate treatment in binary logistic models used to assess for fair lending. Our Monte Carlo experiments provide information on how sample design affects efficiency (in terms of mean squared error) of estimation of the disparate treatment parameter and power of a test for statistical insignificance of this parameter. The sample design requires two decision levels: first, the degree of stratification of the loan applicants (Level I Decision) and secondly, given a Level I Decision, how to allocate the sample across strata (Level II Decision). We examine four Level I stratification strategies: no stratification (simple random sampling), exogenously stratifying loan cases by race, endogenously stratifying cases by loan outcome (denied or approved), and stratifying exogenously by race and endogenously by outcome. Then, we consider five Level II methods: proportional, balanced, and three designs based on applied studies. Our results strongly support the use of stratifying by both race and loan outcome coupled with a balanced sample design when interest is in estimation of, or testing for statistical significance of, the disparate treatment parameter. Copyright Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2004
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
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.:
- N. E. Breslow & N. Chatterjee, 1999. "Design and analysis of two-phase studies with binary outcome applied to Wilms tumour prognosis," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 48(4), pages 457-468.
- Harrison, Glenn W, 1998. "Mortgage Lending in Boston: A Reconsideration of the Evidence," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(1), pages 29-38, January.
- Calem Paul & Stutzer Michael, 1995. "The Simple Analytics of Observed Discrimination in Credit Markets," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 189-212, July.
- Calem, Paul S & Longhofer, Stanley D, 2002. "Anatomy of a Fair Lending Exam: The Uses and Limitations of Statistics," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 207-37, May.
- Robert Avery & Patricia Beeson & Paul Calem, 1997. "Using HMDA Data as a Regulatory Screen for Fair Lending Compliance," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 9-42, February.
- Mitchell Stengel & Dennis Glennon, 1999. "Evaluating Statistical Models of Mortgage Lending Discrimination: A Bank-Specific Analysis," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 27(2), pages 299-334.
- Paul Calem & Michael Stutzer, 1995. "The simple analytics of observed discrimination in credit markets," Working Papers 95-7, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
- Alicia H. Munnell, 1992.
"Mortgage lending in Boston: interpreting HMDA data,"
92-7, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
- Munnell, Alicia H. & Geoffrey M. B. Tootell & Lynn E. Browne & James McEneaney, 1996. "Mortgage Lending in Boston: Interpreting HMDA Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 25-53, March.
- Day, Theodore E & Liebowitz, S J, 1998. "Mortgage Lending to Minorities: Where's the Bias?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(1), pages 3-28, January.
- Helen F. Ladd, 1998. "Evidence on Discrimination in Mortgage Lending," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 41-62, Spring.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jrefec:v:30:y:2004:i:1:p:5-31. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn)or (Christopher F. Baum)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.