Sensitivity analysis of the unconfoundedness assumption in observational studies
In observational studies, the estimation of a treatment effect on an outcome of interest is often done by controlling on a set of pre-treatment characteristics (covariates). This yields an unbiased estimator of the treatment effect when the assumption of unconfoundedness holds, that is, there are no unobserved covariates affecting both the treatment assignment and the outcome. This is in general not realistically testable. It is, therefore, important to conduct an analysis about how sensitive the inference is with respect to the unconfoundedness assumption. In this paper we propose a procedure to conduct such a Bayesian sensitivity analysis, where the usual parameter uncertainty and the uncertainty due to the unconfoundedness assumption can be compared. To measure departures from the assumption we use a correlation coefficient which is intuitively comprehensible and ensures that the results of sensitivity analyses made on different evaluation studies are comparable. Our procedure is applied to the Lalonde data and to a study of the effect of college choice on income in Sweden.
|Date of creation:||10 Jun 2009|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (+46) 18 - 471 70 70
Fax: (+46) 18 - 471 70 71
Web page: http://www.ifau.se/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Sander Greenland, 2005. "Multiple-bias modelling for analysis of observational data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 168(2), pages 267-306.
- LaLonde, Robert J, 1986. "Evaluating the Econometric Evaluations of Training Programs with Experimental Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 604-20, September.
- John Copas & Shinto Eguchi, 2005. "Local model uncertainty and incomplete-data bias (with discussion)," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 67(4), pages 459-513.
- John Copas & Shinto Eguchi, 2001. "Local sensitivity approximations for selectivity bias," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 63(4), pages 871-895.
- Guildo W. Imbens, 2003. "Sensitivity to Exogeneity Assumptions in Program Evaluation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 126-132, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:ifauwp:2009_012. 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: (Margareta Wicklander)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.