IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v54y2025i1p74-105.html

Graphical Causal Models for Survey Inference

Author

Listed:
  • Julian Schuessler
  • Peter Selb

Abstract

Directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) are now a popular tool to inform causal inferences. We discuss how DAGs can also be used to encode theoretical assumptions about nonprobability samples and survey nonresponse and to determine whether population quantities including conditional distributions and regressions can be identified. We describe sources of bias and assumptions for eliminating it in various selection scenarios. We then introduce and analyze graphical representations of multiple selection stages in the data collection process, and highlight the strong assumptions implicit in using only design weights. Furthermore, we show that the common practice of selecting adjustment variables based on correlations with sample selection and outcome variables of interest is ill-justified and that nonresponse weighting when the interest is in causal inference may come at severe costs. Finally, we identify further areas for survey methodology research that can benefit from advances in causal graph theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Julian Schuessler & Peter Selb, 2025. "Graphical Causal Models for Survey Inference," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 54(1), pages 74-105, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:54:y:2025:i:1:p:74-105
    DOI: 10.1177/00491241231176851
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00491241231176851
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00491241231176851?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. Steiner Peter M. & Kim Yongnam, 2016. "The Mechanics of Omitted Variable Bias: Bias Amplification and Cancellation of Offsetting Biases," Journal of Causal Inference, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 1, September.
    2. Steiner Peter M. & Kim Yongnam, 2016. "The Mechanics of Omitted Variable Bias: Bias Amplification and Cancellation of Offsetting Biases," Journal of Causal Inference, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 1-22, September.
    3. F. Kreuter & K. Olson & J. Wagner & T. Yan & T. M. Ezzati‐Rice & C. Casas‐Cordero & M. Lemay & A. Peytchev & R. M. Groves & T. E. Raghunathan, 2010. "Using proxy measures and other correlates of survey outcomes to adjust for non‐response: examples from multiple surveys," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 173(2), pages 389-407, April.
    4. Xinran Li & Peng Ding, 2017. "General Forms of Finite Population Central Limit Theorems with Applications to Causal Inference," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(520), pages 1759-1769, October.
    5. Halbert White & Xun Lu, 2011. "Causal Diagrams for Treatment Effect Estimation with Application to Efficient Covariate Selection," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1453-1459, November.
    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. Felix Elwert & Fabian T. Pfeffer, 2022. "The Future Strikes Back: Using Future Treatments to Detect and Reduce Hidden Bias," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 51(3), pages 1014-1051, August.
    2. Tarek Azzam & Michael Bates & David Fairris, 2019. "Do Learning Communities Increase First Year College Retention? Testing Sample Selection and External Validity of Randomized Control Trials," Working Papers 202002, University of California at Riverside, Department of Economics.
    3. Yue Fang & Geert Ridder, 2025. "The Exact Variance of the Average Treatment Effect Estimator in Cluster Randomized Controlled Trials," Papers 2511.05801, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2025.
    4. Gabriele B. Durrant & Sylke V. Schnepf, 2018. "Which schools and pupils respond to educational achievement surveys?: a focus on the English Programme for International Student Assessment sample," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 181(4), pages 1057-1075, October.
    5. David Cutler & Kaushik Ghosh & Irina Bondarenko & Kassandra Messer & Trivellore Raghunathan & Susan Stewart & Allison B. Rosen, 2018. "Attributing Medical Spending to Conditions: A Comparison of Methods," NBER Working Papers 25233, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Clément de Chaisemartin, 2022. "Trading-off Bias and Variance in Stratified Experiments and in Staggered Adoption Designs, Under a Boundedness Condition on the Magnitude of the Treatment Effect," Working Papers hal-03873919, HAL.
    7. Ashesh Rambachan & Jonathan Roth, 2026. "Design-Based Uncertainty for Quasi-Experiments," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 121(553), pages 477-491, January.
    8. Andy Peytchev, 2013. "Consequences of Survey Nonresponse," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 645(1), pages 88-111, January.
    9. Wang, Yuhao & Li, Xinran, 2025. "Asymptotic theory of the best-choice rerandomization using the Mahalanobis distance," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 251(C).
    10. Halbert White & Karim Chalak, 2013. "Identification and Identification Failure for Treatment Effects Using Structural Systems," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(3), pages 273-317, November.
    11. Xun Lu, 2015. "A Covariate Selection Criterion for Estimation of Treatment Effects," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(4), pages 506-522, October.
    12. Han, Kevin & Basse, Guillaume & Bojinov, Iavor, 2024. "Population interference in panel experiments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 238(1).
    13. 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.
    14. Durrant Gabriele B. & Maslovskaya Olga & Smith Peter W. F., 2017. "Using Prior Wave Information and Paradata: Can They Help to Predict Response Outcomes and Call Sequence Length in a Longitudinal Study?," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 801-833, September.
    15. Zhexiao Lin & Peng Ding, 2025. "Unifying regression-based and design-based causal inference in time-series experiments," Papers 2510.22864, arXiv.org.
    16. Fang Han, 2024. "An Introduction to Permutation Processes (version 0.5)," Papers 2407.09664, arXiv.org.
    17. Plewis Ian & Shlomo Natalie, 2017. "Using Response Propensity Models to Improve the Quality of Response Data in Longitudinal Studies," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 753-779, September.
    18. Xiaokang Luo & Tirthankar Dasgupta & Minge Xie & Regina Y. Liu, 2021. "Leveraging the Fisher randomization test using confidence distributions: Inference, combination and fusion learning," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 83(4), pages 777-797, September.
    19. Peter Z. Schochet, 2018. "Design-Based Estimators for Average Treatment Effects for Multi-Armed RCTs," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 43(5), pages 568-593, October.
    20. Rainey, Carlisle, 2025. "Power Rules: Practical Statistical Power Calculations," OSF Preprints 5am9q, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:sae:somere:v:54:y:2025:i:1:p:74-105. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.