SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Max Tabord-Meehan

Publications and source records attributed to Max Tabord-Meehan.

17 recordsLinked to original sources

Graph-Laplacian Variance Estimators for Finely Stratified Experiments

This paper considers design-based inference on the average treatment effect in finely stratified experiments, where uncertainty arises only from the randomized treatment assignment. We focus on settings in which units are first stratified into groups of fixed size according to baseline covariates and, then within each group, exactly one unit is assigned to treatment. In this setting, we introduce a class of graph-Laplacian variance estimators in which strata form the vertices of a weighted graph and edge weights determine how between-stratum comparisons are aggregated. The canonical estimator of Imai (2008) corresponds to a complete graph with edge weights normalized so that each stratum has weighted degree one, while a paired-stratum estimator arises from a perfect matching graph. For the subclass of degree-calibrated graphs, in which each vertex has weighted degree one, we derive an exact bias identity showing that the corresponding estimators are upward-biased, with bias governed by squared differences in the true stratum-level treatment effects across adjacent strata. As a result, any such estimator may be used for valid inference. The identity further suggests that paired-stratum estimators constructed from a covariate-based perfect matching can induce small biases when treatment effects vary smoothly with the covariates. Without such smoothness, however, we show that paired-stratum estimators can exhibit large worst-case bias, and that, within the class of degree-calibrated estimators, the complete-graph estimator is minimax optimal for normalized bias under a weak bound on treatment-effect heterogeneity. Motivated by this contrast, we propose a regularized graph estimator that controls worst-case normalized bias while preserving much of the locality of the paired-stratum estimator. Simulations illustrate the resulting tradeoff between locality and worst-case protection.

econ.EM

Inference for Linear Systems with Unknown Coefficients

This paper considers the problem of testing whether there exists a solution satisfying certain non-negativity constraints to a linear system of equations. Importantly and in contrast to some prior work, we allow all parameters in the system of equations, including the slope coefficients, to be unknown. For this reason, we describe the linear system as having unknown (as opposed to known) coefficients. This hypothesis testing problem arises naturally when constructing confidence sets for possibly partially identified parameters in the analysis of nonparametric instrumental variables models, treatment effect models, and random coefficient models, among other settings. To rule out certain instances in which the testing problem is impossible, in the sense that the power of any test will be bounded by its size, we begin our analysis by characterizing the closure of the null hypothesis with respect to the total variation distance. We then use this characterization to develop novel testing procedures based on sample-splitting. We establish the validity of our testing procedures under weak and interpretable conditions on the linear system. An important feature of these conditions is that they permit the dimensionality of the problem to grow rapidly with the sample size. A further attractive property of our tests is that they do not require simulation to compute suitable critical values. We illustrate the practical relevance of our theoretical results in a simulation study.

econ.EM

A New Design-Based Variance Estimator for Finely Stratified Experiments

This paper considers the problem of design-based inference for the average treatment effect in finely stratified experiments. Here, by "design-based'' we mean that the only source of uncertainty stems from the randomness in treatment assignment; by "finely stratified'' we mean that units are stratified into groups of a fixed size according to baseline covariates and then, within each group, a fixed number of units are assigned uniformly at random to treatment and the remainder to control. In this setting we present a novel estimator of the variance of the difference-in-means based on pairing "adjacent" strata. Importantly, our estimator is well defined even in the challenging setting where there is exactly one treated or control unit per stratum. We prove that our estimator is upward-biased, and thus can be used for inference under mild restrictions on the finite population. We compare our estimator with some well-known estimators that have been proposed previously in this setting, and demonstrate that, while these estimators are also upward-biased, our estimator has smaller bias and therefore leads to more precise inferences whenever adjacent strata are sufficiently similar. To further understand when our estimator leads to more precise inferences, we introduce a framework motivated by a thought experiment in which the finite population is modeled as having been drawn once in an i.i.d. fashion from a well-behaved probability distribution. In this framework, we argue that our estimator dominates the others in terms of limiting bias and that these improvements are strict except under strong restrictions on the treatment effects. Finally, we illustrate the practical relevance of our theoretical results through a simulation study, which reveals that our estimator can in fact lead to substantially more precise inferences, especially when the quality of stratification is high.

econ.EM

Sharp Testable Implications of Encouragement Designs

This paper studies a potential outcome model with a continuous or discrete outcome, a discrete multi-valued treatment, and a discrete multi-valued instrument. We derive sharp, closed-form testable implications for a class of restrictions on potential treatments where each value of the instrument encourages towards at most one unique treatment choice; such restrictions serve as the key identifying assumption in several prominent recent empirical papers. Borrowing the terminology used in randomized experiments, we call such a setting an encouragement design. The testable implications are inequalities in terms of the conditional distributions of choices and the outcome given the instrument. Through a novel constructive argument, we show these inequalities are sharp in the sense that any distribution of the observed data that satisfies these inequalities is compatible with this class of restrictions on potential treatments. Based on these inequalities, we propose tests of the restrictions. In an empirical application, we show some of these restrictions are violated and pinpoint the substitution pattern that leads to the violation.

econ.EM

Inference in Experiments with Matched Pairs and Imperfect Compliance

This paper studies inference for the local average treatment effect in randomized controlled trials with imperfect compliance where treatment status is determined according to "matched pairs." By "matched pairs," we mean that units are sampled i.i.d. from the population of interest, paired according to observed, baseline covariates and finally, within each pair, one unit is selected at random for treatment. Under weak assumptions governing the quality of the pairings, we first derive the limit distribution of the usual Wald (i.e., two-stage least squares) estimator of the local average treatment effect. We show further that conventional heteroskedasticity-robust estimators of the Wald estimator's limiting variance are generally conservative, in that their probability limits are (typically strictly) larger than the limiting variance. We therefore provide an alternative estimator of the limiting variance that is consistent. Finally, we consider the use of additional observed, baseline covariates not used in pairing units to increase the precision with which we can estimate the local average treatment effect. To this end, we derive the limiting behavior of a two-stage least squares estimator of the local average treatment effect which includes both the additional covariates in addition to pair fixed effects, and show that its limiting variance is always less than or equal to that of the Wald estimator. To complete our analysis, we provide a consistent estimator of this limiting variance. A simulation study confirms the practical relevance of our theoretical results. Finally, we apply our results to revisit a prominent experiment studying the effect of macroinsurance on microenterprise in Egypt.

econ.EM

Testing the Fairness-Accuracy Improvability of Algorithms

Many organizations use algorithms that have a disparate impact, i.e., the benefits or harms of the algorithm fall disproportionately on certain social groups. Addressing an algorithm's disparate impact can be challenging, however, because it is often unclear whether it is possible to reduce this impact without sacrificing other objectives of the organization, such as accuracy or profit. Establishing the improvability of algorithms with respect to multiple criteria is of both conceptual and practical interest: in many settings, disparate impact that would otherwise be prohibited under US federal law is permissible if it is necessary to achieve a legitimate business interest. The question is how a policy-maker can formally substantiate, or refute, this "necessity" defense. In this paper, we provide an econometric framework for testing the hypothesis that it is possible to improve on the fairness of an algorithm without compromising on other pre-specified objectives. Our proposed test is simple to implement and can be applied under any exogenous constraint on the algorithm space. We establish the large-sample validity and consistency of our test, and microfound the test's robustness to manipulation based on a game between a policymaker and the analyst. Finally, we apply our approach to evaluate a healthcare algorithm originally considered by Obermeyer et al. (2019), and quantify the extent to which the algorithm's disparate impact can be reduced without compromising the accuracy of its predictions.

econ.EM

A Primer on the Analysis of Randomized Experiments and a Survey of some Recent Advances

The past two decades have witnessed a surge of new research in the analysis of randomized experiments. The emergence of this literature may seem surprising given the widespread use and long history of experiments as the "gold standard" in program evaluation, but this body of work has revealed many subtle aspects of randomized experiments that may have been previously unappreciated. This article provides an overview of some of these topics, primarily focused on stratification, regression adjustment, and cluster randomization.

econ.EM

Inference for Cluster Randomized Experiments with Non-ignorable Cluster Sizes

This paper considers the problem of inference in cluster randomized experiments when cluster sizes are non-ignorable. Here, by a cluster randomized experiment, we mean one in which treatment is assigned at the cluster level. By non-ignorable cluster sizes, we refer to the possibility that the treatment effects may depend non-trivially on the cluster sizes. We frame our analysis in a super-population framework in which cluster sizes are random. In this way, our analysis departs from earlier analyses of cluster randomized experiments in which cluster sizes are treated as non-random. We distinguish between two different parameters of interest: the equally-weighted cluster-level average treatment effect, and the size-weighted cluster-level average treatment effect. For each parameter, we provide methods for inference in an asymptotic framework where the number of clusters tends to infinity and treatment is assigned using a covariate-adaptive stratified randomization procedure. We additionally permit the experimenter to sample only a subset of the units within each cluster rather than the entire cluster and demonstrate the implications of such sampling for some commonly used estimators. A small simulation study and empirical demonstration show the practical relevance of our theoretical results.

econ.EM

Exposure effects are not automatically useful for policymaking

We thank Savje (2023) for a thought-provoking article and appreciate the opportunity to share our perspective as social scientists. In his article, Savje recommends misspecified exposure effects as a way to avoid strong assumptions about interference when analyzing the results of an experiment. In this invited discussion, we highlight a limiation of Savje's recommendation: exposure effects are not generally useful for evaluating social policies without the strong assumptions that Savje seeks to avoid.

econ.EM

Inference for Matched Tuples and Fully Blocked Factorial Designs

This paper studies inference in randomized controlled trials with multiple treatments, where treatment status is determined according to a "matched tuples" design. Here, by a matched tuples design, we mean an experimental design where units are sampled i.i.d. from the population of interest, grouped into "homogeneous" blocks with cardinality equal to the number of treatments, and finally, within each block, each treatment is assigned exactly once uniformly at random. We first study estimation and inference for matched tuples designs in the general setting where the parameter of interest is a vector of linear contrasts over the collection of average potential outcomes for each treatment. Parameters of this form include standard average treatment effects used to compare one treatment relative to another, but also include parameters which may be of interest in the analysis of factorial designs. We first establish conditions under which a sample analogue estimator is asymptotically normal and construct a consistent estimator of its corresponding asymptotic variance. Combining these results establishes the asymptotic exactness of tests based on these estimators. In contrast, we show that, for two common testing procedures based on t-tests constructed from linear regressions, one test is generally conservative while the other generally invalid. We go on to apply our results to study the asymptotic properties of what we call "fully-blocked" 2^K factorial designs, which are simply matched tuples designs applied to a full factorial experiment. Leveraging our previous results, we establish that our estimator achieves a lower asymptotic variance under the fully-blocked design than that under any stratified factorial design which stratifies the experimental sample into a finite number of "large" strata. A simulation study and empirical application illustrate the practical relevance of our results.

econ.EM

Revisiting the Analysis of Matched-Pair and Stratified Experiments in the Presence of Attrition

In this paper we revisit some common recommendations regarding the analysis of matched-pair and stratified experimental designs in the presence of attrition. Our main objective is to clarify a number of well-known claims about the practice of dropping pairs with an attrited unit when analyzing matched-pair designs. Contradictory advice appears in the literature about whether or not dropping pairs is beneficial or harmful, and stratifying into larger groups has been recommended as a resolution to the issue. To address these claims, we derive the estimands obtained from the difference-in-means estimator in a matched-pair design both when the observations from pairs with an attrited unit are retained and when they are dropped. We find limited evidence to support the claims that dropping pairs helps recover the average treatment effect, but we find that it may potentially help in recovering a convex weighted average of conditional average treatment effects. We report similar findings for stratified designs when studying the estimands obtained from a regression of outcomes on treatment with and without strata fixed effects.

econ.EM

On the Efficiency of Highly Stratified Experiments

This paper studies the use of highly stratified designs for the efficient estimation of a large class of treatment effect parameters that arise in the analysis of experiments. By a "highly stratified" design, we mean experiments in which units are divided into blocks of a fixed size and a proportion within each block is assigned to a binary treatment uniformly at random. The class of parameters considered are those that can be expressed as the solution to a set of moment conditions constructed using a known function of the observed data. They include, among other things, average treatment effects, quantile treatment effects, and local average treatment effects as well as the counterparts to these quantities in experiments in which the unit is itself a cluster. In this setting, we establish three results. First, we show that under a highly stratified design, the na\"ive method of moments estimator achieves the same asymptotic variance as what could typically be attained under alternative treatment assignment mechanisms only through ex post covariate adjustment. Second, we argue that the na\"ive method of moments estimator under a highly stratified design is asymptotically efficient by deriving a lower bound on the asymptotic variance of regular estimators of the parameter of interest in the form of a convolution theorem. In this sense, highly stratified experiments are attractive because they lead to efficient estimators of treatment effect parameters "by design." Finally, we strengthen this conclusion by establishing conditions under which a "fast-balancing" property of highly stratified designs is in fact necessary for the na\"ive method of moments estimator to attain the efficiency bound.

econ.EM

Inference in Cluster Randomized Trials with Matched Pairs

This paper studies inference in cluster randomized trials where treatment status is determined according to a "matched pairs" design. Here, by a cluster randomized experiment, we mean one in which treatment is assigned at the level of the cluster; by a "matched pairs" design, we mean that a sample of clusters is paired according to baseline, cluster-level covariates and, within each pair, one cluster is selected at random for treatment. We study the large-sample behavior of a weighted difference-in-means estimator and derive two distinct sets of results depending on if the matching procedure does or does not match on cluster size. We then propose a single variance estimator which is consistent in either regime. Combining these results establishes the asymptotic exactness of tests based on these estimators. Next, we consider the properties of two common testing procedures based on t-tests constructed from linear regressions, and argue that both are generally conservative in our framework. We additionally study the behavior of a randomization test which permutes the treatment status for clusters within pairs, and establish its finite-sample and asymptotic validity for testing specific null hypotheses. Finally, we propose a covariate-adjusted estimator which adjusts for additional baseline covariates not used for treatment assignment, and establish conditions under which such an estimator leads to strict improvements in precision. A simulation study confirms the practical relevance of our theoretical results.

econ.EM

Stratification Trees for Adaptive Randomization in Randomized Controlled Trials

This paper proposes an adaptive randomization procedure for two-stage randomized controlled trials. The method uses data from a first-wave experiment in order to determine how to stratify in a second wave of the experiment, where the objective is to minimize the variance of an estimator for the average treatment effect (ATE). We consider selection from a class of stratified randomization procedures which we call stratification trees: these are procedures whose strata can be represented as decision trees, with differing treatment assignment probabilities across strata. By using the first wave to estimate a stratification tree, we simultaneously select which covariates to use for stratification, how to stratify over these covariates, as well as the assignment probabilities within these strata. Our main result shows that using this randomization procedure with an appropriate estimator results in an asymptotic variance which is minimal in the class of stratification trees. Moreover, the results we present are able to accommodate a large class of assignment mechanisms within strata, including stratified block randomization. In a simulation study, we find that our method, paired with an appropriate cross-validation procedure ,can improve on ad-hoc choices of stratification. We conclude by applying our method to the study in Karlan and Wood (2017), where we estimate stratification trees using the first wave of their experiment.

econ.EM

The Local Approach to Causal Inference under Network Interference

We propose a new nonparametric modeling framework for causal inference when outcomes depend on how agents are linked in a social or economic network. Such network interference describes a large literature on treatment spillovers, social interactions, social learning, information diffusion, disease and financial contagion, social capital formation, and more. Our approach works by first characterizing how an agent is linked in the network using the configuration of other agents and connections nearby as measured by path distance. The impact of a policy or treatment assignment is then learned by pooling outcome data across similarly configured agents. We demonstrate the approach by deriving finite-sample bounds on the mean-squared error of a k-nearest-neighbor estimator for the average treatment response as well as proposing an asymptotically valid test for the hypothesis of policy irrelevance.

econ.EM

Model Selection for Treatment Choice: Penalized Welfare Maximization

This paper studies a penalized statistical decision rule for the treatment assignment problem. Consider the setting of a utilitarian policy maker who must use sample data to allocate a binary treatment to members of a population, based on their observable characteristics. We model this problem as a statistical decision problem where the policy maker must choose a subset of the covariate space to assign to treatment, out of a class of potential subsets. We focus on settings in which the policy maker may want to select amongst a collection of constrained subset classes: examples include choosing the number of covariates over which to perform best-subset selection, and model selection when approximating a complicated class via a sieve. We adapt and extend results from statistical learning to develop the Penalized Welfare Maximization (PWM) rule. We establish an oracle inequality for the regret of the PWM rule which shows that it is able to perform model selection over the collection of available classes. We then use this oracle inequality to derive relevant bounds on maximum regret for PWM. An important consequence of our results is that we are able to formalize model-selection using a "hold-out" procedure, where the policy maker would first estimate various policies using half of the data, and then select the policy which performs the best when evaluated on the other half of the data.

math.ST

Inference with Dyadic Data: Asymptotic Behavior of the Dyadic-Robust t-Statistic

This paper is concerned with inference in the linear model with dyadic data. Dyadic data is data that is indexed by pairs of "units", for example trade data between pairs of countries. Because of the potential for observations with a unit in common to be correlated, standard inference procedures may not perform as expected. We establish a range of conditions under which a t-statistic with the dyadic-robust variance estimator of Fafchamps and Gubert (2007) is asymptotically normal. Using our theoretical results as a guide, we perform a simulation exercise to study the validity of the normal approximation, as well as the performance of a novel finite-sample correction. We conclude with guidelines for applied researchers wishing to use the dyadic-robust estimator for inference.

math.ST