Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Home
  • Home
Article
  • Access

Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference

  • Daniel E. Ho (a1), Kosuke Imai (a2), Gary King (a3) and Elizabeth A. Stuart (a4)

Abstract

Although published works rarely include causal estimates from more than a few model specifications, authors usually choose the presented estimates from numerous trial runs readers never see. Given the often large variation in estimates across choices of control variables, functional forms, and other modeling assumptions, how can researchers ensure that the few estimates presented are accurate or representative? How do readers know that publications are not merely demonstrations that it is possible to find a specification that fits the author's favorite hypothesis? And how do we evaluate or even define statistical properties like unbiasedness or mean squared error when no unique model or estimator even exists? Matching methods, which offer the promise of causal inference with fewer assumptions, constitute one possible way forward, but crucial results in this fast-growing methodological literature are often grossly misinterpreted. We explain how to avoid these misinterpretations and propose a unified approach that makes it possible for researchers to preprocess data with matching (such as with the easy-to-use software we offer) and then to apply the best parametric techniques they would have used anyway. This procedure makes parametric models produce more accurate and considerably less model-dependent causal inferences.

    •

      • 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.

      Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference
      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.

      Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference
      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.

      Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

COPYRIGHT: © The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Political Methodology 

References

Hide All
Abadie, Alberto, Druckker, David, Herr, Jane Leber, and Imbens, Guido W. 2002. Implementing matching estimators for average treatment effects in stata. The Stata Journal 1: 1–18.
Abadie, Alberto, and Imbens, Guido. 2006a. Estimation of the conditional variance in paired experiments. KSG working paper. http://ksghome.harvard.edu/∼.aabadie.academic.ksg/cve.pdf (accessed September 1, 2006).
Abadie, Alberto, and Imbens, Guido. 2006b. Large sample properties of matching estimators for average treatment effects. Econometrica 74: 235–67.
Becker, Sascha O., and Ichino, Andrea. 2002. Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores. The Stata Journal 2: 358–77.
Bergstralh, Erik, and Kosanke, Jon. 2003. dist, gmatch, and vmatch: SAS macros. Mayo Clinic, Division of Biostatistics. http://mayoresearch.mayo.edu/mayo/research/biostat/sasmacros.cfm (accessed September 1, 2006).
Bishop, Christopher M. 1995. Neural networks for pattern recognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Black, Dan A., and Smith, Jeffrey A. 2004. How robust is the evidence on the effects of college quality? Evidence from matching. Journal of Econometrics 121: 99–124.
Carpenter, Daniel P. 2002. Groups, the media, agency waiting costs, and FDA drug approval. American Journal of Political Science 46 (July): 490–505.
Cochran, William G. 1968. The effectiveness of adjustment by subclassification in removing bias in observational studies. Biometrics 24: 295–313.
Cochran, William G., and Rubin, Donald B. 1973. Controlling bias in observational studies: A review. Sankhya: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Series A 35 (Part 4): 417–66.
Cox, David R. 1958. Planning of experiments. New York: John Wiley.
Dehejia, Rajeev H., and Wahba, Sadek. 1999. Causal effects in nonexperimental studies: Re-evaluating the evaluation of training programs. Journal of the American Statistical Association 94 (December): 1053–62.
Diamond, Alexis, and Sekhon, Jasjeet. 2005. Genetic matching for estimating causal effects: A new method of achieving balance in observational studies. http://sekhon.berkeley.edu/ (accessed September 1, 2006).
Fisher, Ronald A. 1935. The design of experiments. London: Oliver and Boyd.
Frölich, Markus. 2004. Finite sample properties of propensity score matching and weighting estimators. Review of Econometrics and Statistics 86: 77–90.
Glazerman, Steve, Levy, Dan M., and Myers, David. 2003. Nonexperimental versus experimental estimates of earnings impacts. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 589 (September): 63–93.
Goldberger, Arthur. 1991. A course in econometrics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gu, Xing S., and Rosenbaum, Paul R. 1993. Comparison of multivariate matching methods: Structures, distances, and algorithms. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 2: 405–20.
Hansen, Ben B. 2004. Full matching in an observational study of coaching for the SAT. Journal of the American Statistical Association 99: 609–18.
Hansen, Ben B. 2005. Optmatch: Software for optimal matching. http://www.stat.lsa.umich.edu/∼bh/optmatch.html (accessed September 1, 2006).
Heckman, James J., Ichimura, Hidehiko, Smith, Jeffrey A., and Todd, Petra E. 1998. Characterizing selection bias using experimental data. Econometrica 66: 1017–98.
Heckman, James J., Ichimura, Hidehiko, and Todd, Petra E. 1997. Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: Evidence from evaluating a job training program. Review of Economic Studies 64: 605–54.
Heckman, James J., and Robb, Richard. 1985. Alternative methods for evaluating the impacts of interventions. In Longitudinal analysis of labor market data, ed. Heckman, J. and Singer, B.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hirano, Keisuke, Imbens, Guido W., and Ridder, Geert. 2003. Efficient estimation of average treatment effects using the estimated propensity score. Econometrica 71 (July): 1161–89.
Ho, Daniel E., Imai, Kosuke, King, Gary, and Stuart, Elizabeth A. 2006. Replication data set for ‘matching as nonparametric preprocessing for reducing model dependence in parametric causal inference’. http://id.thedata.org/hdl%3A1902.1%2FYVDZEQIYDS hdl:1902.1/YVDZEQIYDS UNF:3:QV0mYCd8eV+mJg WDnYct5g== Murray Research Archive [distributed by DDI].
Hoeting, Jennifer A., Madigan, David, Raftery, Adrian E., and Volinsky, Chris T. 1999. Bayesian model averaging: A tutorial. Statistical Science 14: 382–417.
Holland, Paul W. 1986. Statistics and causal inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association 81: 945–60.
Iacus, Stefano, and Porro, Giuseppe. 2006. Random recursive partitioning: A matching method for the estimation of the average treatment effect. UNIMI—Research Papers in Economics, Business, and Statistics. Economics. Working paper 9. http://services.bepress.com/unimi/economics/art9 (accessed September 1, 2006).
Imai, Kosuke, and King, Gary. 2004. Did illegal overseas absentee ballots decide the 2000 U.S. presidential election? Perspectives on Politics 2 (September): 537–49.
Imai, Kosuke, King, Gary, and Lau, Olivia. 2006. Zelig: Everyone's statistical software. http://gking.harvard.edu/zelig (accessed September 1, 2006).
Imai, Kosuke, King, Gary, and Stuart, Elizabeth A. 2006. Misunderstandings among experimentalists and observationalists: Balance test fallacies in causal inference. http://gking.harvard.edu/files/abs/matchse-abs.shtml (accessed September 1, 2006).
Imai, Kosuke, and van Dyk, David A. 2004. Causal inference with general treatment regimes: Generalizing the propensity score. Journal of the American Statistical Association 99 (September): 854–66.
Imbens, Guido W. 2004. Nonparametric estimation of average treatment effects under exogeneity: A review. Review of Economics and Statistics 86: 4–29.
King, Gary. 1989. Unifying political methodology: The likelihood theory of statistical inference. Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press.
King, Gary, Honaker, James, Joseph, Anne, and Scheve, Kenneth. 2001. Analyzing incomplete political science data: An alternative algorithm for multiple imputation. American Political Science Review 95 (March): 49–69. http://gking.harvard.edu/files/abs/evil-abs.shtml (accessed September 1, 2006).
King, Gary, Keohane, Robert O., and Verba, Sidney. 1994. Designing social inquiry: Scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
King, Gary, and Zeng, Langche. 2006. The dangers of extreme counterfactuals. Political Analysis 14: 131–59. http://gking.harvard.edu/files/abs/counterft-abs.shtml (accessed September 1, 2006).
King, Gary, and Zeng, Langche. 2007. When can history be our guide? The pitfalls of counterfactual inference. International Studies Quarterly (March). http://gking.harvard.edu/files/abs/counterf-abs.shtml.
Koch, Jeffrey M. 2002. Gender stereotypes and citizens' impressions of house candidates' ideological orientation. American Journal of Political Science 46: 453–62.
Lechner, Michael. 2000. A note on the common support problem in applied evaluation studies. University of St. Galen. http://www.siaw.unisg.ch/lechner (accessed September 1, 2006).
Leuven, Edwin, and Sianesi, Barbara. 2004. PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing. EconPapers. http://econpapers.repec.org/software/bocbocode/S432001.htm (accessed September 1, 2006).
Lewis, David K. 1973. Counterfactuals. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
McCullagh, Peter, and Nelder, James A. 1989. Generalized linear models. 2nd ed. Monograph on statistics and applied probability 37. New York (NY): Chapman & Hall/CRC.
Meng, Xiao-Li, and Romero, Martin. 2003. Discussion: Efficiency and self-efficiency with multiple imputation inference. International Statistical Review 71: 607–18.
Neyman, Jerzy. 1935. Statistical problems in agricultural experiments. Supplement to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 2: 107–80.
Parsons, Lori S. 2000. Using SAS software to perform a case-control match on propensity score in an observational study. http://www2.sas.com/proceedings/sugi25/25/po/25p225.pdf (accessed September 1, 2006).
Parsons, Lori S. 2001. Reducing bias in a propensity score matched-pair sample using greedy matching techniques.
http://www2.sas.com/proceedings/sugi26/p214-26.pdf (accessed September 1, 2006).
Quandt, Richard. 1972. Methods of estimating switching regressions. Journal of the American Statistical Association 67: 306–10.
Robins, James M., and Rotnitzky, Andrea. 2001. Comment on the Peter J. Bickel and Jaimyoung Kwon, ‘Inference for semiparametric models: Some questions and an answer’. Statistica Sinica 11: 920–36.
Robins, James M., and Rotnitzky, Andrea. Forthcoming. Inverse probability weighting estimation in survival analysis. Encyclopedia of Biostatistics.
Rosenbaum, Paul R. 1984. The consequences of adjusting for a concomitant variable that has been affected by the treatment. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 147: 656–66.
Rosenbaum, Paul R. 1986. Dropping out of high school in the United States: An observational study. Journal of Educational Statistics 11: 207–24.
Rosenbaum, Paul R. 1989. Optimal matching for observational studies. Journal of the American Statistical Association 84: 1024–32.
Rosenbaum, Paul R. 2002. Observational studies. 2nd ed. New York: Springer.
Rosenbaum, Paul R., and Rubin, Donald B. 1983. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70: 41–55.
Rosenbaum, Paul R., and Rubin, Donald B. 1984. Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. Journal of the American Statistical Association 79: 516–24.
Rosenbaum, Paul R., and Rubin, Donald B. 1985. The bias due to incomplete matching. Biometrics 41: 103–16.
Rosenbaum, Paul R., and Silber, Jeffrey H. 2001. Matching and thick description in an observational study of mortality after surgery. Biostatistics 2: 217–32.
Roy, A. D. 1951. Some thoughts on the distribution of earnings. Oxford Economic Papers 3: 135–46.
Rubin, Donald B. 1973. The use of matched sampling and regression adjustment to remove bias in observational studies. Biometrics 29: 185–203.
Rubin, Donald B. 1974. Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology 6: 688–701.
Rubin, Donald B. 1978. Bayesian inference for causal effects: The role of randomization. The Annals of Statistics 6: 34–58.
Rubin, Donald B. 1979. Using multivariate matched sampling and regression adjustment to control bias in observational studies. Journal of the American Statistical Association 74: 318–28.
Rubin, Donald B. 1987. Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: John Wiley.
Rubin, Donald B. 2001. Using propensity scores to help design observational studies: Application to the tobacco litigation. Health Services & Outcomes Research Methodology 2 (December): 169–88.
Rubin, Donald B., and Stuart, Elizabeth A. 2006. Affinely invariant matching methods with discriminant mixtures of proportional ellipsoidally symmetric distributions. Annals of Statistics 34: 1814–1826.
Rubin, Donald B., and Thomas, Neal. 1992. Characterizing the effect of matching using linear propensity score methods with normal distributions. Biometrika 79: 797–809.
Rubin, Donald B., and Thomas, Neal. 1996. Matching using estimated propensity scores, relating theory to practice. Biometrics 52: 249–64.
Rubin, Donald B., and Thomas, Neal. 2000. Combining propensity score matching with additional adjustments for prognostic covariates. Journal of the American Statistical Association 95: 573–85.
Sekhon, Jasjeet S. 2004. Multivariate and propensity score matching software. http://jsekhon.fas.harvard.edu/matching/ (accessed September 1, 2006).
Smith, Herbert L. 1997. Matching with multiple controls to estimate treatment effects in observational studies. Sociological Methodology 27: 325–53.
Smith, Jeffrey A., and Todd, Petra E. 2005. Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators? Journal of Econometrics 125 (March-April): 305–53.
Stuart, Elizabeth A. 2004. Matching methods for estimating causal effects using multiple control groups. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Statistics, Harvard University.
MathJax
MathJax is a JavaScript display engine for mathematics. For more information see http://www.mathjax.org.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO
  • Access

Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference

  • Daniel E. Ho (a1), Kosuke Imai (a2), Gary King (a3) and Elizabeth A. Stuart (a4)

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

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.