179 research outputs found
Binscatter Regressions
We introduce the \texttt{Stata} (and \texttt{R}) package \textsf{Binsreg},
which implements the binscatter methods developed in
\citet*{Cattaneo-Crump-Farrell-Feng_2019_Binscatter}. The package includes the
commands \texttt{binsreg}, \texttt{binsregtest}, and \texttt{binsregselect}.
The first command (\texttt{binsreg}) implements binscatter for the regression
function and its derivatives, offering several point estimation, confidence
intervals and confidence bands procedures, with particular focus on
constructing binned scatter plots. The second command (\texttt{binsregtest})
implements hypothesis testing procedures for parametric specification and for
nonparametric shape restrictions of the unknown regression function. Finally,
the third command (\texttt{binsregselect}) implements data-driven number of
bins selectors for binscatter implementation using either quantile-spaced or
evenly-spaced binning/partitioning. All the commands allow for covariate
adjustment, smoothness restrictions, weighting and clustering, among other
features. A companion \texttt{R} package with the same capabilities is also
available
On Binscatter
Binscatter is very popular in applied microeconomics. It provides a flexible,
yet parsimonious way of visualizing and summarizing large data sets in
regression settings, and it is often used for informal evaluation of
substantive hypotheses such as linearity or monotonicity of the regression
function. This paper presents a foundational, thorough analysis of binscatter:
we give an array of theoretical and practical results that aid both in
understanding current practices (i.e., their validity or lack thereof) and in
offering theory-based guidance for future applications. Our main results
include principled number of bins selection, confidence intervals and bands,
hypothesis tests for parametric and shape restrictions of the regression
function, and several other new methods, applicable to canonical binscatter as
well as higher-order polynomial, covariate-adjusted and smoothness-restricted
extensions thereof. In particular, we highlight important methodological
problems related to covariate adjustment methods used in current practice. We
also discuss extensions to clustered data. Our results are illustrated with
simulated and real data throughout. Companion general-purpose software packages
for \texttt{Stata} and \texttt{R} are provided. Finally, from a technical
perspective, new theoretical results for partitioning-based series estimation
are obtained that may be of independent interest
Dealing with Limited Overlap in Estimation of Average Treatment Effects
Estimation of average treatment effects under unconfounded or ignorable treatment assignment is often hampered by lack of overlap in the covariate distributions. This lack of overlap can lead to imprecise estimates and can make commonly used estimators sensitive to the choice of specification. In such cases researchers have often used informal methods for trimming the sample. In this paper we develop a systematic approach to addressing lack of overlap. We characterize optimal subsamples for which the average treatment effect can be estimated most precisely, as well as optimally weighted average treatment effects. Under some conditions the optimal selection rules depend solely on the propensity score. For a wide range of distributions a good approximation to the optimal rule is provided by the simple selection rule to drop all units with estimated propensity scores outside the range [0.1, 0.9].Average Treatment Effects, Causality, Unconfoundness, Overlap, Treatment Effect Heterogeneity
Moving the Goalposts: Addressing Limited Overlap in Estimation of Average Treatment Effects by Changing the Estimand
Estimation of average treatment effects under unconfoundedness or exogenous treatment assignment is often hampered by lack of overlap in the covariate distributions. This lack of overlap can lead to imprecise estimates and can make commonly used estimators sensitive to the choice of specification. In such cases researchers have often used informal methods for trimming the sample. In this paper we develop a systematic approach to addressing such lack of overlap. We characterize optimal subsamples for which the average treatment effect can be estimated most precisely, as well as optimally weighted average treatment effects. Under some conditions the optimal selection rules depend solely on the propensity score. For a wide range of distributions a good approximation to the optimal rule is provided by the simple selection rule to drop all units with estimated propensity scores outside the range [0.1, 0.9].average treatment effects, causality, unconfoundedness, overlap, treatment effect heterogeneity
Nonparametric Tests for Treatment Effect Heterogeneity
A large part of the recent literature on program evaluation has focused on estimation of the average effect of the treatment under assumptions of unconfoundedness or ignorability following the seminal work by Rubin (1974) and Rosenbaum and Rubin (1983). In many cases however, researchers are interested in the effects of programs beyond estimates of the overall average or the average for the subpopulation of treated individuals. It may be of substantive interest to investigate whether there is any subpopulation for which a program or treatment has a nonzero average effect, or whether there is heterogeneity in the effect of the treatment. The hypothesis that the average effect of the treatment is zero for all subpopulations is also important for researchers interested in assessing assumptions concerning the selection mechanism. In this paper we develop two nonparametric tests. The first test is for the null hypothesis that the treatment has a zero average effect for any subpopulation defined by covariates. The second test is for the null hypothesis that the average effect conditional on the covariates is identical for all subpopulations, in other words, that there is no heterogeneity in average treatment effects by covariates. Sacrificing some generality by focusing on these two specific null hypotheses we derive tests that are straightforward to implement.average treatment effects, causality, unconfoundedness, treatment effect heterogeneity
Moving the Goalposts: Addressing Limited Overlap in the Estimation of Average Treatment Effects by Changing the Estimand
Estimation of average treatment effects under unconfoundedness or exogenous treatment assignment is often hampered by lack of overlap in the covariate distributions. This lack of overlap can lead to imprecise estimates and can make commonly used estimators sensitive to the choice of specification. In such cases researchers have often used informal methods for trimming the sample. In this paper we develop a systematic approach to addressing such lack of overlap. We characterize optimal subsamples for which the average treatment effect can be estimated most precisely, as well as optimally weighted average treatment effects. Under some conditions the optimal selection rules depend solely on the propensity score. For a wide range of distributions a good approximation to the optimal rule is provided by the simple selection rule to drop all units with estimated propensity scores outside the range [0.1,0.9].
Nonparametric Tests for Treatment Effect Heterogeneity
A large part of the recent literature on program evaluation has focused on estimation of the average effect of the treatment under assumptions of unconfoundedness or ignorability following the seminal work by Rubin (1974) and Rosenbaum and Rubin (1983). In many cases however, researchers are interested in the effects of programs beyond estimates of the overall average or the average for the subpopulation of treated individuals. It may be of substantive interest to investigate whether there is any subpopulation for which a program or treatment has a nonzero average effect, or whether there is heterogeneity in the effect of the treatment. The hypothesis that the average effect of the treatment is zero for all subpopulations is also important for researchers interested in assessing assumptions concerning the selection mechanism. In this paper we develop two nonparametric tests. The first test is for the null hypothesis that the treatment has a zero average effect for any subpopulation defined by covariates. The second test is for the null hypothesis that the average effect conditional on the covariates is identical for all subpopulations, in other words, that there is no heterogeneity in average treatment effects by covariates. Sacrificing some generality by focusing on these two specific null hypotheses we derive tests that are straightforward to implement.
Recommended from our members
Dealing with Limited Overlap in Estimation of Average Treatment Effects
Estimation of average treatment effects under unconfounded or ignorable treatment assignment is often hampered by lack of overlap in the covariate distributions between treatment groups. This lack of overlap can lead to imprecise estimates, and can make commonly used estimators sensitive to the choice of specification. In such cases researchers have often used ad hoc methods for trimming the sample. We develop a systematic approach to addressing lack of overlap. We characterize optimal subsamples for which the average treatment effect can be estimated most precisely. Under some conditions, the optimal selection rules depend solely on the propensity score. For a wide range of distributions, a good approximation to the optimal rule is provided by the simple rule of thumb to discard all units with estimated propensity scores outside the range [0.1,0.9].Economic
- …