Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Reasoning about Interference Between Units: A General Framework

  • Jake Bowers (a1), Mark M. Fredrickson (a2) and Costas Panagopoulos (a3)
Abstract

If an experimental treatment is experienced by both treated and control group units, tests of hypotheses about causal effects may be difficult to conceptualize, let alone execute. In this article, we show how counterfactual causal models may be written and tested when theories suggest spillover or other network-based interference among experimental units. We show that the “no interference” assumption need not constrain scholars who have interesting questions about interference. We offer researchers the ability to model theories about how treatment given to some units may come to influence outcomes for other units. We further show how to test hypotheses about these causal effects, and we provide tools to enable researchers to assess the operating characteristics of their tests given their own models, designs, test statistics, and data. The conceptual and methodological framework we develop here is particularly applicable to social networks, but may be usefully deployed whenever a researcher wonders about interference between units. Interference between units need not be an untestable assumption; instead, interference is an opportunity to ask meaningful questions about theoretically interesting phenomena.

Copyright
Corresponding author
e-mail: jwbowers@illinois.edu (corresponding author)
Footnotes
Hide All

Authors' note: Thanks are due to the participants in the Student-Faculty Workshop in the Department of Political Science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, at the Experiments in Governance and Politics Workshop at MIT (EGAP-6), our panel at MPSA 2012, SLAMM 2012, and Polmeth 2012. We especially appreciate the in-depth comments provided by Peter Aronow, John Freeman, Matthew Hayes, Luke Keele, Cyrus Samii, Cara Wong, and the anonymous reviewers.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Aronow, M. Peter. 2012. A general method for detecting interference between units in randomized experiments. Sociological Methods & Research 41(3): 316.
Aronow, M. Peter, and Samii, Cyrus. 2012a. Estimating average causal effects under general interference. Working paper.
Aronow, M. Peter, and Samii, Cyrus. 2012b. Large sample coverage properties of inverted exact test intervals for randomized experiments. Working paper.
Barnard, G. A. 1947. Significance tests for 2 × 2 tables. Biometrika 34 (1–2): 123–38.
Berger, R. L., and Boos, D. D. 1994. P-values maximized over a confidence set for the nuisance parameter. Journal of the American Statistical Association 89(427): 10121016.
Brady, Henry E. 2008. Causation and explanation in social science. In Oxford handbook of political methodology, eds. Box-Steffensmeier, J. M., Brady, H. E., and Collier, D., 217–70. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Chen, J., Humphreys, M., and Modi, V. 2010. Technology diffusion and social networks: Evidence from a field experiment in Uganda. Paper presented at EGAP 4 at New York University.
Cox, David R. 1958. The planning of experiments. New York: John Wiley.
Fisher, R. A. 1935. The design of experiments. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.
Fredrickson, Mark M., and Bowers, Jake. 2012. Reproduction archive for “reasoning about interference between units: A general framework.” http://hdl.3andle.net/1902.1/18933.
Hansen, B. Ben, and Bowers, Jake. 2008. Covariate balance in simple, stratified, and clustered comparative studies. Statistical Science 23(2): 219–36.
Hansen, B. Ben, and Bowers, Jake. 2009. Attributing effects to a cluster randomized get-out-the-vote campaign. Journal of the American Statistical Association 104(487): 873–85.
Hollander, Myles. 1999. Nonparametric statistical methods. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
Hong, G., and Raudenbush, S. W. 2006. Evaluating kindergarten retention policy. Journal of the American Statistical Association 101(475): 901–10.
Hudgens, M. G., and Halloran, M. E. 2008. Toward causal inference with interference. Journal of the American Statistical Association 103(482): 832–42.
Ichino, N., and Schündeln, M. 2012a. Deterring or displacing electoral irregularities? Spillover effects of observers in a randomized field experiment in Ghana. Working paper.
Ichino, N., and Schündeln, M. 2012b. Deterring or displacing electoral irregularities? Spillover effects of observers in a randomized field experiment in Ghana. Journal of Politics 74(1): 292307.
Imbens, G., and Rubin, D. 2009. Causal inference in statistics. Unpublished book manuscript. Forthcoming at Cambridge University Press.
Keele, L., McConnaughy, C., and White, I. 2012. Strengthening the experimenter's toolbox: Statistical estimation of internal validity. American Journal of Political Science 56(2): 484–99.
Miguel, E., and Kremer, M. 2004. Worms: identifying impacts on education and health in the presence of treatment externalities. Econometrica 72(1): 159217.
Neyman, J. 1923. [1990]. On the application of probability theory to agricultural experiments: Essay on principles. Section 9 (1923). Statistical Science 5: 463480 (Reprint, transl. by Dabrowska and Speed).
Nickerson, D. W. 2008. Is voting contagious? Evidence from two field experiments. American Political Science Review 102 (l): 4957.
Nickerson, D. W. 2011. Social networks and political context. In Cambridge handbook of experimental political science, eds. Druckman, J. N., Green, D. P., Kuklinski, J. H., and Lupia, A., 273–86. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Nolen, T. L., and Hudgens, M. 2011. Randomization-based inference within principal strata. Journal of the American Statistical Association 106(494): 581–93.
Panagopoulos, Costas. 2006. The impact of newspaper advertising on voter turnout: Evidence from a field experiment. Paper presented at the MPSA 2006.
Panagopoulos, Costas, and Bowers, Jake. 2012. Do newspaper ads raise voter turnout? Evidence from a randomized field experiment. Unpublished manuscript, Chicago, IL.
Rosenbaum, Paul R. 2002. Observational studies. 2nd ed. New York: Springer.
Rosenbaum, Paul R. 2007. Interference between units in randomized experiments. Journal of the American Statistical Association 102(477): 191200.
Rosenbaum, Paul R. 2010. Design of Observational studies. New York: Springer. http://www.springer.com/statistics/statistical+theory+and+methods/book/978-1-4419-1212-1.
Rosenblum, M., and Van Der Laan, M. J. 2009. Using regression models to analyze randomized trials: Asymptotically valid hypothesis tests despite incorrectly specified models. Biometrics 65(3): 937–45.
Rubin, D. B. 1980. Randomization analysis of experimental data: The Fisher randomization test comment. Journal of the American Statistical Association 75(371): 591–93.
Rubin, D. B. 1986. Which ifs have causal answers? Comments on “statistics and causal inference.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 81: 961–62.
Rubin, D. B. 2005. Causal inference using potential outcomes: Design, modeling, decisions. Journal of the American Statistical Association 100: 322–31.
Rubin, D. B. 2010. Reflections stimulated by the comments of Shadish (2010) and West and Thoemmes (2010). Psychological Methods 15(1): 3846.
Samii, C., and Aronow, P. M. 2012. On equivalencies between design-based and regression-based variance estimators for randomized experiments. Statistics & Probability Letters 82(2): 365–70.
Sekhon, Jasjeet S. 2008. The Neyman-Rubin model of causal inference and estimation via matching methods. In Oxford handbook of political methodology, eds. Box-Steffensmeier, J. M., Brady, H. E., and Collier, D., 271–99. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Siegel, D. A. 2009. Social networks and collective action. American Journal of Political Science 53(1): 122–38.
Silvapulle, M. J. 1996. A test in the presence of nuisance parameters. Journal of the American Statistical Association 91(436): 16901693.
Sinclair, B. 2011. Design and analysis of experiments in multilevel populations. In Cambridge handbook of experimental political science, eds. Druckman, J. N., Green, D. P., Kuklinski, J. H., and Lupia, A., 481–93. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Sinclair, B., McConnell, M., and Green, D. P. 2012. Detecting spillover effects: Design and analysis of multilevel experiments. American Journal of Political Science 56(4): 1055–69.
Sobel, M. E. 2006. What do randomized studies of housing mobility demonstrate? Journal of the American Statistical Association 101(476): 1398–407.
Tchetgen, E. J. T., and VanderWeele, T. J. 2012. On causal inference in the presence of interference. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 21(1): 5575.
VanderWeele, T. J. 2008. Ignorability and stability assumptions in neighborhood effects research. Statistics in Medicine 27(11): 1934–43.
VanderWeele, T. J. 2010. Direct and indirect effects for neighborhood-based clustered and longitudinal data. Sociological Methods & Research 38(4): 515.
VanderWeele, T. J., and Tchetgen, E. J. T. 2011a. Effect partitioning under interference in two-stage randomized vaccine trials. Statistics & probability letters 81(7): 861–69.
VanderWeele, T. J., and Tchetgen, E. J. T. 2011b. Bounding the infectiousness effect in vaccine trials. Epidemiology 22(5): 686–93.
VanderWeele, T. J., Tchetgen, E. J. T., and Halloran, M. E. 2012. Components of the indirect effect in vaccine trials: Identification of contagion and infectiousness effects. Epidemiology 23(5): 751–61.
VanderWeele, T. J., Vandenbroucke, J. P., Tchetgen, E. J. T., and Robins, J. M. 2012. A mapping between interactions and interference: Implications for vaccine trials. Epidemiology 23(2): 285–92.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Political Analysis
  • ISSN: 1047-1987
  • EISSN: 1476-4989
  • URL: /core/journals/political-analysis
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
MathJax

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