IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/251185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bounding Causes of Effects With Mediators

Author

Listed:
  • Dawid, Philip
  • Humphreys, Macartan
  • Musio, Monica

Abstract

Suppose X and Y are binary exposure and outcome variables, and we have full knowledge of the distribution of Y, given application of X. We are interested in assessing whether an outcome in some case is due to the exposure. This "probability of causation" is of interest in comparative historical analysis where scholars use process tracing approaches to learn about causes of outcomes for single units by observing events along a causal path. The probability of causation is typically not identified, but bounds can be placed on it. Here, we provide a full characterization of the bounds that can be achieved in the ideal case that X and Y are connected by a causal chain of complete mediators, and we know the probabilistic structure of the full chain. Our results are largely negative. We show that, even in these very favorable conditions, the gains from positive evidence on mediators is modest.

Suggested Citation

  • Dawid, Philip & Humphreys, Macartan & Musio, Monica, 2022. "Bounding Causes of Effects With Mediators," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue OnlineFir, pages 1-1.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:251185
    DOI: 10.1177/00491241211036161
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/251185/1/Full-text-article-Dawid-et-al-Bounding-causes-of.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00491241211036161?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. Deborah Ghate, 2018. "Developing theories of change for social programmes: co-producing evidence-supported quality improvement," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Humphreys, Macartan & Scacco, Alexandra, 2020. "The aggregation challenge," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 127, pages 1-3.
    3. Blair, Graeme & Cooper, Jasper & Coppock, Alexander & Humphreys, Macartan, 2019. "Declaring and Diagnosing Research Designs," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 113(3), pages 838-859, August.
    4. Grossman, Guy & Humphreys, Macartan & Sacramone-Lutz, Gabriella, 2020. "Information Technology and Political Engagement: Mixed Evidence from Uganda," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 82(4), pages 1321-1336.
    5. Blair, Graeme & Cooper, Jasper & Coppock, Alexander & Humphreys, Macartan, 2019. "Declaring and Diagnosing Research Designs," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 113(3), pages 838-859.
    6. 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.
    7. Humphreys, Macartan & Scacco, Alexandra, 2020. "The aggregation challenge," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    8. White, Howard, 2009. "Theory-Based Impact Evaluation," 3ie Publications 2009-3, International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie).
    9. repec:cup:apsrev:v:113:y:2019:i:03:p:838-859_00 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Esterling, Kevin & Brady, David & Schwitzgebel, Eric, 2021. "The Necessity of Construct and External Validity for Generalized Causal Claims," OSF Preprints 2s8w5, Center for Open Science.
    2. Brodeur, Abel & Esterling, Kevin & Ankel-Peters, Jörg & Bueno, Natália S. & Desposato, Scott & Dreber, Anna & Genovese, Federica & Green, Donald P. & Hepplewhite, Matthew & Hoces de la Guardia, Fernan, 2024. "Promoting Reproducibility and Replicability in Political Science," I4R Discussion Paper Series 100, The Institute for Replication (I4R).
    3. Karthik Muralidharan & Mauricio Romero & Kaspar Wüthrich, 2019. "Factorial Designs, Model Selection, and (Incorrect) Inference in Randomized Experiments," NBER Working Papers 26562, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. McKenzie, David & Mohpal, Aakash & Yang, Dean, 2022. "Aspirations and financial decisions: Experimental evidence from the Philippines," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    5. Bharathi, Naveen & Malghan, Deepak & Mishra, Sumit & Rahman, Andaleeb, 2021. "Fractal urbanism: City size and residential segregation in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    6. Chad Hazlett & Tanvi Shinkre, 2024. "Understanding and avoiding the "weights of regression": Heterogeneous effects, misspecification, and longstanding solutions," Papers 2403.03299, arXiv.org.
    7. Philip Dawid & Macartan Humphreys & Monica Musio, 2019. "Bounding Causes of Effects with Mediators," Papers 1907.00399, arXiv.org.
    8. Lam, Steven & Dodd, Warren & Wyngaarden, Sara & Skinner, Kelly & Papadopoulos, Andrew & Harper, Sherilee L., 2021. "How and why are Theory of Change and Realist Evaluation used in food security contexts? A scoping review," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    9. Johnson, Nancy L. & Atherstone, Christine & Grace, Delia, 2015. "The potential of farm-level technologies and practices to contribute to reducing consumer exposure to aflatoxins: A theory of change analysis:," IFPRI discussion papers 1452, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    10. Bante, Jana & Helmig, Felix & Prasad, Lara & Scheu, Lea Deborah & Seipel, Jean Christoph & Senkpiel, Helge & Geray, Markus & von Schiller, Armin & Sebudubudu, David & Ziaja, Sebastian, 2021. "E-government and democracy in Botswana: Observational and experimental evidence on the effects of e-government usage on political attitudes," IDOS Discussion Papers 16/2021, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    11. 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.
    12. Maria Lo Bue & Stephan Klasen, 2013. "Identifying Synergies and Complementarities Between MDGs: Results from Cluster Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 113(2), pages 647-670, September.
    13. Guido W. Imbens, 2020. "Potential Outcome and Directed Acyclic Graph Approaches to Causality: Relevance for Empirical Practice in Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(4), pages 1129-1179, December.
    14. Sara Rafael Almeida & Joana Sousa Lourenco & Francois J. Dessart & Emanuele Ciriolo, 2017. "Insights from behavioural sciences to prevent and combat violence against women. Literature review," JRC Research Reports JRC103975, Joint Research Centre.
    15. Quentin Ssossé & Johanna Wagner & Carina Hopper, 2021. "Assessing the Impact of ESD: Methods, Challenges, Results," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-26, March.
    16. Faraz Usmani & Marc Jeuland & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak, 2018. "NGOs and the effectiveness of interventions," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2018-59, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    17. Joana Silva Afonso, 2020. "Impact evaluation, social performance assessment and standardisation: reflections from microfinance evaluations in Pakistan and Zimbabwe," Working Papers in Economics & Finance 2020-14, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth Business School, Economics and Finance Subject Group.
    18. Gwenolé Le Velly & Céline Dutilly, 2016. "Evaluating Payments for Environmental Services: Methodological Challenges," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, February.
    19. André de Abreu Saraiva Monteiro Alves & Marcelo Pereira Duarte & Fernando Manuel Pereira de Oliveira Carvalho, 2022. "A Perspective on Administrative Distance: Theoretical Development and Measurement," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.
    20. Russell Hillberry & Phillip McCalman, 2016. "Import dynamics and demands for protection," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(3), pages 1125-1152, August.

    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:zbw:espost:251185. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.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.