IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jnlbes/v34y2016i1p139-160.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Finite Sample Performance of Estimators for Mediation Analysis Under Sequential Conditional Independence

Author

Listed:
  • Martin Huber
  • Michael Lechner
  • Giovanni Mellace

Abstract

Using a comprehensive simulation study based on empirical data, this article investigates the finite sample properties of different classes of parametric and semiparametric estimators of (natural) direct and indirect causal effects used in mediation analysis under sequential conditional independence assumptions. The estimators are based on regression, inverse probability weighting, and combinations thereof. Our simulation design uses a large population of Swiss jobseekers and considers variations of several features of the data-generating process (DGP) and the implementation of the estimators that are of practical relevance. We find that no estimator performs uniformly best (in terms of root mean squared error) in all simulations. Overall, so-called “g-computation” dominates. However, differences between estimators are often (but not always) minor in the various setups and the relative performance of the methods often (but not always) varies with the features of the DGP.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Huber & Michael Lechner & Giovanni Mellace, 2016. "The Finite Sample Performance of Estimators for Mediation Analysis Under Sequential Conditional Independence," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 139-160, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jnlbes:v:34:y:2016:i:1:p:139-160
    DOI: 10.1080/07350015.2015.1017644
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/07350015.2015.1017644
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stefanie Behncke & Markus Frölich & Michael Lechner, 2010. "A Caseworker Like Me - Does The Similarity Between The Unemployed and Their Caseworkers Increase Job Placements?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(549), pages 1430-1459, December.
    2. Arun Advani & Tymon Sloczynski, 2013. "Mostly harmless simulations? On the internal validity of empirical Monte Carlo studies," CeMMAP working papers CWP64/13, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    3. Lechner, Michael & Wunsch, Conny, 2013. "Sensitivity of matching-based program evaluations to the availability of control variables," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 111-121.
    4. Huber, Martin & Lechner, Michael & Wunsch, Conny, 2013. "The performance of estimators based on the propensity score," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 175(1), pages 1-21.
    5. Andrew Gelman & Guido Imbens, 2013. "Why ask Why? Forward Causal Inference and Reverse Causal Questions," NBER Working Papers 19614, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Flores, Carlos A. & Flores-Lagunes, Alfonso, 2009. "Identification and Estimation of Causal Mechanisms and Net Effects of a Treatment under Unconfoundedness," IZA Discussion Papers 4237, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Newey, Whitney K., 1984. "A method of moments interpretation of sequential estimators," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 14(2-3), pages 201-206.
    8. van der Laan Mark J. & Rubin Daniel, 2006. "Targeted Maximum Likelihood Learning," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-40, December.
    9. Raymond Hicks & Dustin Tingley, 2011. "Causal mediation analysis," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 11(4), pages 605-619, December.
    10. repec:tpr:restat:v:99:y:2017:i:1:p:180-183 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Imai, Kosuke & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2013. "Identification and Sensitivity Analysis for Multiple Causal Mechanisms: Revisiting Evidence from Framing Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(02), pages 141-171, March.
    12. Martin Huber & Michael Lechner & Giovanni Mellace, 2017. "Why Do Tougher Caseworkers Increase Employment? The Role of Program Assignment as a Causal Mechanism," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(1), pages 180-183, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Arun Advani & Toru Kitagawa & Tymon S{l}oczy'nski, 2018. "Mostly Harmless Simulations? Using Monte Carlo Studies for Estimator Selection," Papers 1809.09527, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2019.
    2. repec:eee:csdana:v:115:y:2017:i:c:p:91-102 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Advani, Arun & Sloczynski, Tymon, 2013. "Mostly Harmless Simulations? On the Internal Validity of Empirical Monte Carlo Studies," IZA Discussion Papers 7874, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Bodory, Hugo & Camponovo, Lorenzo & Huber, Martin & Lechner, Michael, 2016. "The finite sample performance of inference methods for propensity score matching and weighting estimators," Economics Working Paper Series 1604, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    5. Bijwaard, Govert & Alessie, Rob & Angelini, Viola, 2018. "The Effect of Early Life Health on Later Life Home Care Use: The Mediating Role of Household Composition," IZA Discussion Papers 11729, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Frölich, Markus & Huber, Martin & Wiesenfarth, Manuel, 2017. "The finite sample performance of semi- and non-parametric estimators for treatment effects and policy evaluation," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 91-102.
    7. Stephen Whelan, 2017. "Does homeownership affect education outcomes?," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 342-342, April.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models

    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:taf:jnlbes:v:34:y:2016:i:1:p:139-160. 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: (Chris Longhurst). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/UBES20 .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.