Causal Inference Under Approximate Neighborhood Interference

This paper studies causal inference in randomized experiments under network interference. Most existing models of interference posit that treatments assigned to alters only affect the ego's response through a low-dimensional exposure mapping, which only depends on units within some known network radius around the ego. We propose a substantially weaker "approximate neighborhood interference" (ANI) assumption, which allows treatments assigned to alters far from the ego to have a small, but potentially nonzero, impact on the ego's response. Unlike the exposure mapping model, we can show that ANI is satisfied in well-known models of social interactions. Despite its generality, inference in a single-network setting is still possible under ANI, as we prove that standard inverse-probability weighting estimators can consistently estimate treatment and spillover effects and are asymptotically normal. For practical inference, we propose a new conservative variance estimator based on a network bootstrap and suggest a data-dependent bandwidth using the network diameter. Finally, we illustrate our results in a simulation study and empirical application.

[1]  Gonzalo Vázquez-Baré Identification and Estimation of Spillover Effects in Randomized Experiments , 2017, 1711.02745.

[2]  Cameron Marlow,et al.  A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization , 2012, Nature.

[3]  Mark S. Granovetter Threshold Models of Collective Behavior , 1978, American Journal of Sociology.

[4]  G. Imbens,et al.  A Causal Bootstrap , 2018, The Annals of Statistics.

[5]  Éva Tardos,et al.  Maximizing the Spread of Influence through a Social Network , 2015, Theory Comput..

[6]  Susan Athey,et al.  Sampling‐Based versus Design‐Based Uncertainty in Regression Analysis , 2017, Econometrica.

[7]  Kyungchul Song,et al.  Measuring Diffusion over a Large Network , 2018, Review of Economic Studies.

[8]  G. Imbens,et al.  Exact p-Values for Network Interference , 2015, 1506.02084.

[9]  Rokhaya Dieye,et al.  Accounting for Peer Effects in Treatment Response , 2014, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[10]  C. Manski Identification of Endogenous Social Effects: The Reflection Problem , 1993 .

[11]  P. Doukhan,et al.  A new weak dependence condition and applications to moment inequalities , 1999 .

[12]  David S. Choi,et al.  Estimation of Monotone Treatment Effects in Network Experiments , 2014, ArXiv.

[13]  Fredrik Sävje,et al.  AVERAGE TREATMENT EFFECTS IN THE PRESENCE OF UNKNOWN INTERFERENCE. , 2017, Annals of statistics.

[14]  Andrea Montanari,et al.  The spread of innovations in social networks , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[16]  O. Bandiera,et al.  Social Connections and Incentives in the Workplace: Evidence from Personnel Data , 2009, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[17]  Edward Miguel,et al.  Worms: Identifying Impacts on Education and Health in the Presence of Treatment Externalities, Guide to Replication of Miguel and Kremer (2004) , 2014 .

[18]  Elizabeth L. Ogburn,et al.  Causal Inference for Social Network Data , 2017, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[19]  Lung-fei Lee Estimation of a Binary Choice Game Model with Network Links , 2015 .

[20]  N. Christakis,et al.  Social network targeting to maximise population behaviour change: a cluster randomised controlled trial , 2015, The Lancet.

[21]  Peter M. Aronow,et al.  Estimating Average Causal Effects Under Interference Between Units , 2013, 1305.6156.

[22]  Thomas Sauerwald,et al.  Diameter and Broadcast Time of Random Geometric Graphs in Arbitrary Dimensions , 2011, Algorithmica.

[23]  I. Prucha,et al.  Central Limit Theorems and Uniform Laws of Large Numbers for Arrays of Random Fields. , 2009, Journal of econometrics.

[24]  Florian Ederer,et al.  Understanding Mechanisms Underlying Peer Effects: Evidence from a Field Experiment on Financial Decisions , 2014 .

[25]  T. Speed,et al.  On the Application of Probability Theory to Agricultural Experiments. Essay on Principles. Section 9 , 1990 .

[26]  Guillaume W. Basse,et al.  Randomization tests of causal effects under interference , 2019, Biometrika.

[27]  Douglas Guilbeault,et al.  Complex Contagions: A Decade in Review , 2017, ArXiv.

[28]  Natalia Lazzati Treatment response with social interactions: Partial identification via monotone comparative statics , 2015 .

[29]  X. Shao,et al.  The Dependent Wild Bootstrap , 2010 .

[30]  J. Dall,et al.  Random geometric graphs. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[31]  J. Aislinn Bohren,et al.  Optimal Design of Experiments in the Presence of Interference , 2017, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[32]  G. Imbens The Role of the Propensity Score in Estimating Dose-Response Functions , 1999 .

[33]  Alex J. Chin,et al.  Central limit theorems via Stein's method for randomized experiments under interference , 2018, 1804.03105.

[34]  E. Paluck,et al.  Changing climates of conflict: A social network experiment in 56 schools , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[35]  Frederico Finan,et al.  Neighborhood Peer Effects in Secondary School Enrollment Decisions , 2009, The Review of Economics and Statistics.

[36]  Paul R. Milgrom,et al.  Rationalizability, Learning, and Equilibrium in Games with Strategic Complementarities , 1990 .

[37]  D. Rubin [On the Application of Probability Theory to Agricultural Experiments. Essay on Principles. Section 9.] Comment: Neyman (1923) and Causal Inference in Experiments and Observational Studies , 1990 .

[38]  Béla Bollobás,et al.  The phase transition in inhomogeneous random graphs , 2007, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[39]  Dean Eckles,et al.  Design and Analysis of Experiments in Networks: Reducing Bias from Interference , 2014, ArXiv.

[40]  Cosma Rohilla Shalizi,et al.  Homophily and Contagion Are Generically Confounded in Observational Social Network Studies , 2010, Sociological methods & research.

[41]  Kyungchul Song,et al.  Limit theorems for network dependent random variables , 2019, Journal of Econometrics.

[42]  Michael P. Leung Inference in Models of Discrete Choice with Social Interactions Using Network Data , 2019, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[43]  P. Aronow A General Method for Detecting Interference Between Units in Randomized Experiments , 2010 .

[44]  M. Hudgens,et al.  Toward Causal Inference With Interference , 2008, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[45]  Peter D. Hoff,et al.  Latent Space Approaches to Social Network Analysis , 2002 .

[46]  Rafael Lalive,et al.  Social Interactions and Schooling Decisions , 2006, The Review of Economics and Statistics.

[47]  Svante Janson,et al.  The Phase Transition , 2011 .

[48]  D. Rubin,et al.  Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences: An Introduction , 2016 .

[49]  Jing Cai,et al.  Social Networks and the Decision to Insure , 2012 .

[50]  Bernard Fortin,et al.  Identification of Peer Effects through Social Networks , 2007, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[51]  Edward K. Kao,et al.  Estimation of Causal Peer Influence Effects , 2013, ICML.

[52]  Daron Acemoglu,et al.  State Capacity and Economic Development: A Network Approach , 2014 .

[53]  Davide Viviano,et al.  Policy Targeting under Network Interference , 2019, Review of Economic Studies.

[54]  Edoardo M. Airoldi,et al.  Identification and Estimation of Treatment and Interference Effects in Observational Studies on Networks , 2016, Journal of the American Statistical Association.