IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2003.13803.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Specification tests for generalized propensity scores using double projections

Author

Listed:
  • Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna
  • Xiaojun Song

Abstract

This paper proposes a new class of nonparametric tests for the correct specification of generalized propensity score models. The test procedure is based on two different projection arguments, which lead to test statistics with several appealing properties. They accommodate high-dimensional covariates; are asymptotically invariant to the estimation method used to estimate the nuisance parameters and do not requite estimators to be root-n asymptotically linear; are fully data-driven and do not require tuning parameters, can be written in closed-form, facilitating the implementation of an easy-to-use multiplier bootstrap procedure. We show that our proposed tests are able to detect a broad class of local alternatives converging to the null at the parametric rate. Monte Carlo simulation studies indicate that our double projected tests have much higher power than other tests available in the literature, highlighting their practical appeal.

Suggested Citation

  • Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna & Xiaojun Song, 2020. "Specification tests for generalized propensity scores using double projections," Papers 2003.13803, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2003.13803
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2003.13803
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Escanciano, J. Carlos, 2006. "A Consistent Diagnostic Test For Regression Models Using Projections," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(6), pages 1030-1051, December.
    2. Sokbae Lee & Ryo Okui & Yoon†Jae Whang, 2017. "Doubly robust uniform confidence band for the conditional average treatment effect function," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(7), pages 1207-1225, November.
    3. Wenceslao González-Manteiga & Rosa Crujeiras, 2013. "An updated review of Goodness-of-Fit tests for regression models," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 22(3), pages 361-411, September.
    4. Cattaneo, Matias D., 2010. "Efficient semiparametric estimation of multi-valued treatment effects under ignorability," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 155(2), pages 138-154, April.
    5. Mora, Juan & Moro-Egido, Ana I., 2008. "On specification testing of ordered discrete choice models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 143(1), pages 191-205, March.
    6. Shu Yang & Guido W. Imbens & Zhanglin Cui & Douglas E. Faries & Zbigniew Kadziola, 2016. "Propensity score matching and subclassification in observational studies with multi‐level treatments," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 72(4), pages 1055-1065, December.
    7. Shaikh, Azeem M. & Simonsen, Marianne & Vytlacil, Edward J. & Yildiz, Nese, 2009. "A specification test for the propensity score using its distribution conditional on participation," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 151(1), pages 33-46, July.
    8. S. Derya Uysal, 2015. "Doubly Robust Estimation of Causal Effects with Multivalued Treatments: An Application to the Returns to Schooling," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(5), pages 763-786, August.
    9. Imbens,Guido W. & Rubin,Donald B., 2015. "Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885881, December.
    10. Sun, Zhihua & Chen, Feifei & Zhou, Xiaohua & Zhang, Qingzhao, 2017. "Improved model checking methods for parametric models with responses missing at random," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 147-161.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2003.13803. 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: (arXiv administrators). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.