Likelihood analysis of the binary instrumental variable model

Instrumental variables are widely used for the identification of the causal effect of one random variable on another under unobserved confounding. The distribution of the observable variables for a discrete instrumental variable model satisfies certain inequalities but no conditional independence relations. Such models are usually tested by checking whether the relative frequency estimators of the parameters satisfy the constraints. This ignores sampling uncertainty in the data. Using the observable constraints for the instrumental variable model, a likelihood analysis is conducted. A significance test for its validity is developed, and a bootstrap algorithm for computing confidence intervals for the causal effect is proposed. Applications are given to illustrate the advantage of the suggested approach. Copyright 2011, Oxford University Press.

[1]  K. Liang,et al.  Asymptotic Properties of Maximum Likelihood Estimators and Likelihood Ratio Tests under Nonstandard Conditions , 1987 .

[2]  Olav Reiersol,et al.  Confluence Analysis by Means of Lag Moments and Other Methods of Confluence Analysis , 1941 .

[3]  N. Sheehan,et al.  Mendelian randomization as an instrumental variable approach to causal inference , 2007, Statistical methods in medical research.

[4]  A. Wald.  The Fitting of Straight Lines if Both Variables are Subject to Error , 1940 .

[5]  Hammou El Barmi,et al.  Testing for and against a set of linear inequality constraints in a multinomial setting , 1995 .

[6]  J. Pearl,et al.  Bounds on Direct Effects in the Presence of Confounded Intermediate Variables , 2008, Biometrics.

[7]  James Durbin,et al.  Errors in variables , 1954 .

[8]  Joshua D. Angrist,et al.  Identification of Causal Effects Using Instrumental Variables , 1993 .

[9]  P. W. Lane,et al.  Zero entries in contingency tables , 1985 .

[10]  D. Rubin.  Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. , 1974 .

[11]  P. Spirtes,et al.  Causation, prediction, and search , 1993 .

[12]  D. Cox,et al.  Complex stochastic systems , 2000 .

[13]  Dylan S. Small,et al.  Bounds on causal effects in three‐arm trials with non‐compliance , 2006 .

[14]  A. Dawid.  Influence Diagrams for Causal Modelling and Inference , 2002 .

[15]  Peter Green,et al.  Highly Structured Stochastic Systems , 2003 .

[16]  Judea Pearl,et al.  From Bayesian networks to causal networks , 1995 .

[17]  Steffen L. Lauritzen,et al.  Causal Inference from Graphical Models , 2001 .

[18]  J. Pearl,et al.  Bounds on Treatment Effects from Studies with Imperfect Compliance , 1997 .

[19]  A. Dawid.  Conditional Independence in Statistical Theory , 1979 .

[20]  Judea Pearl,et al.  Causal inference from indirect experiments , 1995, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[21]  Blai Bonet,et al.  Instrumentality Tests Revisited , 2001, UAI.

[22]  D. Andrews.  Inconsistency of the Bootstrap when a Parameter is on the Boundary of the Parameter Space , 2000 .

[23]  Ap Dawid,et al.  Causal inference using influence diagrams: The problem of partial compliance (with Discussion) , 2003 .

[24]  David Maxwell Chickering,et al.  A Clinician's Tool for Analyzing Non-Compliance , 1996, AAAI/IAAI, Vol. 2.

[25]  D. Rubin,et al.  Bayesian inference for causal effects in randomized experiments with noncompliance , 1997 .

[26]  B. Efron,et al.  Compliance as an Explanatory Variable in Clinical Trials , 1991 .

[27]  S. Zeger,et al.  On estimating efficacy from clinical trials. , 1991, Statistics in medicine.

[28]  Moisés Goldszmidt,et al.  Rank-based Systems: A Simple Approach to Belief Revision, Belief Update, and Reasoning about Evidence and Actions , 1992, KR.

[29]  Roland Ramsahai,et al.  Causal Bounds and Instruments , 2007, UAI.