Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Comparative Causal Mediation and Relaxing the Assumption of No Mediator–Outcome Confounding: An Application to International Law and Audience Costs

  • Kirk Bansak (a1)

Abstract

Experiments often include multiple treatments, with the primary goal to compare the causal effects of those treatments. This study focuses on comparing the causal anatomies of multiple treatments through the use of causal mediation analysis. It proposes a novel set of comparative causal mediation (CCM) estimands that compare the mediation effects of different treatments via a common mediator. Further, it derives the properties of a set of estimators for the CCM estimands and shows these estimators to be consistent (or conservative) under assumptions that do not require the absence of unobserved confounding of the mediator–outcome relationship, which is a strong and nonrefutable assumption that must typically be made for consistent estimation of individual causal mediation effects. To illustrate the method, the study presents an original application investigating whether and how the international legal status of a foreign policy commitment can increase the domestic political “audience costs” that democratic governments suffer for violating such a commitment. The results provide novel evidence that international legalization can enhance audience costs via multiple causal channels, including by amplifying the perceived immorality of violating the commitment.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Comparative Causal Mediation and Relaxing the Assumption of No Mediator–Outcome Confounding: An Application to International Law and Audience Costs
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Comparative Causal Mediation and Relaxing the Assumption of No Mediator–Outcome Confounding: An Application to International Law and Audience Costs
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Comparative Causal Mediation and Relaxing the Assumption of No Mediator–Outcome Confounding: An Application to International Law and Audience Costs
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

Footnotes

Hide All

Author’s note: For helpful advice, the author thanks Avidit Acharya, Justin Grimmer, Jens Hainmueller, Andy Hall, Kosuke Imai, Hye-Sung Kim, Ken Scheve, Mike Tomz, Teppei Yamamoto, and three anonymous reviewers. Replication materials are available in Bansak (2019). The author declares that he has no competing interests.

Contributing Editor: Jeff Gill

Footnotes

References

Hide All
Aaroe, L. 2012. “When Citizens Go Against Elite Directions: Partisan Cues and Contrast Effects on Citizens’ Attitudes.” Party Politics 18(2):215233.
Abbott, K. W., and Snidal, D.. 1998. “Why States Act Through Formal International Organizations.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 42(1):332.
Abbott, K. W., and Snidal, D.. 2000. “Hard and Soft Law in International Governance.” International Organization 54(3):421456.
Acharya, A., Blackwell, M., and Sen, M.. 2016. “Explaining Causal Findings Without Bias: Detecting and Assessing Direct Effects.” American Political Science Review 110(3):512529.
Albert, J. M. 2008. “Mediation Analysis via Potential Outcomes Models.” Statistics in Medicine 27(8):12821304.
Andrews, I., Stock, J. H., and Sun, L.. 2019. “Weak Instruments in IV Regression: Theory and Practice.” Annual Review of Economics .
Angrist, J. D., and Pischke, J.-S.. 2009. Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist’s Companion . Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Arceneaux, K. 2008. “Can Partisan Cues Diminish Democratic Accountability? Political Behavior 30(2):139160.
Arceneaux, K., and Kolodny, R.. 2009. “Educating the Least Informed: Group Endorsements in a Grassroots Campaign.” American Journal of Political Science 53(4):755770.
Ballard, K. 2007. “Convention in Peril? Riot Control Agents and the Chemical Weapons Ban.” Arms Control Today 37(7):1216.
Bansak, K.2019. “Replication Materials for: Comparative Causal Mediation and Relaxing the Assumption of No Mediator-Outcome Confounding: An Application to International Law and Audience Costs.” https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/JLAOEN, Harvard Dataverse, V1.
Baron, R. M., and Kenny, D. A.. 1986. “The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research – Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51(6):11731182.
Bullock, J. G., Green, D. P., and Ha, S. E.. 2010. “Yes, But What’s the Mechanism? (Don’t Expect an Easy Answer).” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 98(4):550558.
Bullock, J. G., and Ha, S. E.. 2011. “Mediation Analysis is Harder than it Looks.” In Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science , edited by Druckman, J. N., Green, D. P., Kuklinski, J. H., and Lupia, A., 508521. chapter 35, Cambridge University Press.
Chaudoin, S. 2014. “Promises or Policies? An Experimental Analysis of International Agreements and Audience Reactions.” International Organization 68(1):235256.
Chilton, A. S. 2014. “The Influence of International Human Rights Agreements on Public Opinion: An Experimental Study.” Chicago Journal of International Law 15:110.
Chilton, A. S. 2015. “The Laws of War and Public Opinion: An Experimental Study.” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 171(1):181201.
Chilton, A. S., and Versteeg, M.. 2016. “International Law, Constitutional Law, and Public Support for Torture.” Research & Politics 3(1): 2053168016636413.
Cochran, W. G. 1963. Sampling Techniques . John Wiley & Sons.
Dai, X. 2005. “Why Comply? The Domestic Constituency Mechanism.” International Organization 59(2):363398.
Daniel, R. M., DeStavola, B. L., Cousens, S. N., and Vansteelandt, S.. 2015. “Causal mediation analysis with multiple mediators.” Biometrics 71(1):114.
Downs, G. W., Rocke, D. M., and Barsoom, P. N.. 1996. “Is the Good News about Compliance Good News about Cooperation? International Organization 50(3):379406.
Fairchild, A. J., and McDaniel, H. L.. 2017. “Best (but Oft-Forgotten) Practices: Mediation Analysis.” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 105(6):12591271.
Fearon, J. D. 1994. “Domestic Political Audiences and the Escalation of International Disputes.” American Political Science Review 88(3):577592.
Fieller, E. C. 1954. “Some Problems in Interval Estimation.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B 16(2):175185.
Flueck, J. A., and Holland, B. S.. 1976. “Ratio Estimators and Some Inherent Problems in their Utilization.” Journal of Applied Meteorology 15(6):535543.
Franz, V. H.2007 “Ratios: A Short Guide to Confidence Limits and Proper Use.” arXiv:0710.2024 Technical report.
Fritz, M. S., and MacKinnon, D. P.. 2007. “Required Sample Size to Detect the Mediated Effect.” Psychological Science 18(3):233239.
Gerber, A. S., and Green, D. P.. 2012. “Mediation.” In Field Experiments: Design, Analysis, and Interpretation , chapter 10, New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Gleser, L. J., and Hwang, J. T.. 1987. “The Nonexistence of 100(1-alpha)% Confidence Sets of Finite Expected Diameter in Errors-in-Variables and Related Models.” The Annals of Statistics 15(4):13511362.
Glynn, A. N. 2012. “The Product and Difference Fallacies for Indirect Effects.” American Journal of Political Science 56(1):257269.
Goldsmith, J. L., and Posner, E. A.. 2005. The Limits of International Law . Oxford University Press.
Goldstein, J. 2001. Legalization and World Politics . MIT Press.
Goren, P., Federico, C. M., and Kittilson, M. C.. 2009. “Source Cues, Partisan Identities, and Political Value Expression.” American Journal of Political Science 53(4):805820.
Hathaway, O. A. 2002. “Do Human Rights Treaties Make a Difference? The Yale Law Journal 111(8):19352042.
Hong, G. 2015. Causality in a Social World: Moderation, Mediation and Spill-Over . John Wiley & Sons.
Hwang, J. T. G. 1995. “Fieller’s Problems and Resampling Techniques.” Statistica Sinica 5:161171.
Hyde, S. D. 2015. “Experiments in International Relations: Lab, Survey, and Field.” Annual Review of Political Science 18:403424.
Imai, K., Jo, B., and Stuart, E. A.. 2011a. “Commentary: Using Potential Outcomes to Understand Causal Mediation Analysis.” Multivariate Behavioral Research 46(5):842854.
Imai, K., Keele, L., and Tingley, D.. 2010a. “A General Approach to Causal Mediation Analysis.” Psychological Methods 15(4):309334.
Imai, K., Keele, L., Tingley, D., and Yamamoto, T.. 2011b. “Unpacking the Black Box of Causality: Learning about Causal Mechanisms from Experimental and Observational Studies.” American Political Science Review 105(4):765789.
Imai, K., Keele, L., and Yamamoto, T.. 2010b. “Identification, Inference, and Sensitivity Analysis for Causal Mediation Effects.” Statistical Science 25:5171.
Imai, K., Tingley, D., and Yamamoto, T.. 2013. “Experimental Designs for Identifying Causal Mechanisms.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 176(1):551.
Imai, K., and Yamamoto, T.. 2013. “Identification and Sensitivity Analysis for Multiple Causal Mechanisms: Revisiting Evidence from Framing Experiments.” Political Analysis 21(2):141171.
James, L. R., and Brett, J. M.. 1984. “Mediators, Moderators, and Tests for Mediation.” Journal of Applied Psychology 69(2):307321.
Jensen, N. M. 2003. “Democratic Governance and Multinational Corporations: Political Regimes and Inflows of Foreign Direct Investment.” International Organization 57(3):587616.
Jo, B. 2008. “Causal Inference in Randomized Experiments with Mediational Processes.” Psychological Methods 13:314336.
Kam, C. D. 2005. “Who Toes the Party Line? Cues, Values, and Individual Differences.” Political Behavior 27(2):163182.
Koschat, M. A. 1987. “A Characterization of the Fieller Solution.” The Annals of Statistics 15(1):462468.
Kraemer, H. C., Kiernan, M., Essex, M., and Kupfer, D. J.. 2008. “How and Why Criteria Defining Moderators and Mediators Differ Between the Baron & Kenny and Macarthur Approaches.” Health Psychology 27(2S):S101.
Lehmann, E. L., and Casella, G.. 2006. Theory of Point Estimation . Springer Science & Business Media.
Levendusky, M. S., and Horowitz, M. C.. 2012. “When Backing Down is the Right Decision: Partisanship, New Information, and Audience Costs.” The Journal of Politics 74(2):323338.
Lipson, C. 1991. “Why are Some International Agreements Informal? International Organization 45(4):495538.
Loeys, T., Talloen, W., Goubert, L., Moerkerke, B., and Vansteelandt, S.. 2016. “Assessing Moderated Mediation in Linear Models Requires Fewer Confounding Assumptions than Assessing Mediation.” British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 69(3):352374.
McGillivray, F., and Smith, A.. 2000. “Trust and Cooperation through Agent-Specific Punishments.” International Organization 54(4):809824.
Moravcsik, A. 2013. “Liberal Theories of International Law.” In Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations , edited by Dunoff, J. L. and Pollack, M. A., 83118. chapter 4, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Morrow, J. D. 2000. “Alliances: Why Write Them Down? Annual Review of Political Science 3(1):6383.
Nelson, C. R., and Startz, R.. 1990. “Some Further Results on the Exact Small Sample Properties of the Instrumental Variable Estimator.” Econometrica 58(4):967976.
Nicholson, S. P. 2012. “Polarizing Cues.” American Journal of Political Science 56(1):5266.
Olea, J. L. M., and Pflueger, C.. 2013. “A Robust Test for Weak Instruments.” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 31(3):358369.
Pearl, J.2001 “Direct and Indirect Effects.” Technical report, Proceedings of the 17th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence.
Pearl, J. 2014. “Interpretation and Identification of Causal Mediation.” Psychological Methods 19(4):459481.
Preacher, K. J. 2007. “Addressing Moderated Mediation Hypotheses: Theory, Methods, and Prescriptions.” Multivariate Behavioral Research 42(1):185227.
Risse-Kappen, T., Ropp, S. C., and Sikkink, K.. 1999. The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change , vol. 66, Cambridge University Press.
Robins, J. M. 1997. “Causal Inference from Complex Longitudinal Data.” In Latent Variable Modeling and Applications to Causality , 69117. Springer.
Robins, J. M. 2003. “Semantics of Causal Dag Models and the Identification of Direct and Indirect Effects.” In Oxford Statistical Science Series , 7082.
Robins, J. M., and Greenland, S.. 1992. “Identifiability and Exchangeability for Direct and Indirect Effects.” Epidemiology 3(2):143155.
Shpitser, I., and VanderWeele, T. J.. 2011. “A Complete Graphical Criterion for the Adjustment Formula in Mediation Analysis.” The International Journal of Biostatistics 7(1):124.
Simmons, B. A. 2009. Mobilizing for Human Rights: International Law in Domestic Politics . Cambridge University Press.
Simmons, B. A., and Hopkins, D. J.. 2005. “The Constraining Power of International Treaties: Theory and Methods.” American Political Science Review 99(4):623631.
Slothuus, R., and de Vreese, C. H.. 2010. “Political Parties, Motivated Reasoning, and Issue Framing Effects.” American Journal of Political Science 72(3):630645.
Staiger, D., and Stock, J. H.. 1997. “Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments.” Econometrica 65(3):557586.
Stock, J. H., Wright, J. H., and Yogo, M.. 2002. “A Survey of Weak Instruments and Weak Identification in Generalized Method of Moments.” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 20(4):518529.
Stock, J. H., and Yogo, M.. 2005. “Testing for Weak Instruments in Linear IV Regression.” In Identification and Inference for Econometric Models: Essays in Honor of Thomas Rothenberg , 80108. Cambridge University Press.
Tchetgen, E. J. T., and Shpitser, I.. 2012. “Semiparametric Theory for Causal Mediation Analysis: Efficiency Bounds, Multiple Robustness, and Sensitivity Analysis.” Annals of Statistics 40(3):18161845.
Thoemmes, F., MacKinnon, D. P., and Reiser, M. R.. 2010. “Power Analysis for Complex Mediational Designs Using Monte Carlo Methods.” Structural Equation Modeling 17(3):510534.
Tomz, M. 2007. “Domestic Audience Costs in International Relations: An Experimental Approach.” International Organization 61:821840.
Trachtman, J. P. 2010. “International Law and Domestic Political Coalitions: The Grand Theory of Compliance with International Law.” Chicago Journal of International Law 11:128129.
VanderWeele, T. J. 2009. “Marginal Structural Models for the Estimation of Direct and Indirect Effects.” Epidemiology 20(1):1826.
VanderWeele, T. J. 2014. “A Unification of Mediation and Interaction: A 4-way Decomposition.” Epidemiology 25(5):749761.
VanderWeele, T. J. 2015. Explanation in Causal Inference: Methods for Mediation and Interaction . New York: Oxford University Press.
von Luxburg, U., and Franz, V. H.. 2009. “A Geometric Approach to Confidence Sets for Ratios: Fieller’s Theorem, Generalizations and Bootstrap.” Statistica Sinica 19:10951117.
Weeks, J. L. 2008. “Autocratic Audience Costs: Regime Type and Signaling Resolve.” International Organization 62(1):3564.
Withers, C. S. 1987. “Bias Reduction by Taylor Series.” Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods 16(8):23692383.
Zhang, Z. 2014. “Monte Carlo Based Statistical Power Analysis for Mediation Models: Methods and Software.” Behavior Research Methods 46(4):11841198.
MathJax
MathJax is a JavaScript display engine for mathematics. For more information see http://www.mathjax.org.

Keywords

Type Description Title
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Bansak supplementary material
Bansak supplementary material 1

 Unknown (398 KB)
398 KB

Comparative Causal Mediation and Relaxing the Assumption of No Mediator–Outcome Confounding: An Application to International Law and Audience Costs

  • Kirk Bansak (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed