Sensitivity Analysis for Instrumental Variables Regression With Overidentifying Restrictions

Instrumental variables regression (IV regression) is a method for making causal inferences about the effect of a treatment based on an observational study in which there are unmeasured confounding variables. The method requires one or more valid instrumental variables (IVs); a valid IV is a variable that is associated with the treatment, is independent of unmeasured confounding variables, and has no direct effect on the outcome. Often there is uncertainty about the validity of the proposed IVs. When a researcher proposes more than one IV, the validity of these IVs can be tested through the “overidentifying restrictions test.” Although the overidentifying restrictions test does provide some information, the test has no power versus certain alternatives and can have low power versus many alternatives due to its omnibus nature. To fully address uncertainty about the validity of the proposed IVs, we argue that a sensitivity analysis is needed. A sensitivity analysis examines the impact of plausible amounts of invalidity of the proposed IVs on inferences for the parameters of interest. We develop a method of sensitivity analysis for IV regression with overidentifying restrictions that makes full use of the information provided by the overidentifying restrictions test but provides more information than the test by exploring sensitivity to violations of the validity of the proposed IVs in directions for which the test has low power. Our sensitivity analysis uses interpretable parameters that can be discussed with subject matter experts. We illustrate our method using a study of food demand among rural households in the Philippines.

[1]  P. J. Huber.  The behavior of maximum likelihood estimates under nonstandard conditions , 1967 .

[2]  L. Hansen.  Large Sample Properties of Generalized Method of Moments Estimators , 1982 .

[3]  H. White.  Asymptotic theory for econometricians , 1985 .

[4]  J. MacKinnon,et al.  Estimation and inference in econometrics , 1994 .

[5]  W. Newey,et al.  Generalized method of moments specification testing , 1985 .

[6]  M. Sobel,et al.  Identification Problems in the Social Sciences. , 1996 .

[7]  P. Rosenbaum.  Dropping out of High School in the United States: An Observational Study , 1986 .

[8]  A. Mas-Colell,et al.  Microeconomic Theory , 1995 .

[9]  T. Rothenberg.  Identification in Parametric Models , 1971 .

[10]  P. Holland.  CAUSAL INFERENCE, PATH ANALYSIS AND RECURSIVE STRUCTURAL EQUATIONS MODELS , 1988 .

[11]  G. W. Imbens.  Sensitivity to Exogeneity Assumptions in Program Evaluation , 2003 .

[12]  W. Loh,et al.  Consistent Variable Selection in Linear Models , 1995 .

[13]  Jerry A. Hausman,et al.  Specification and estimation of simultaneous equation models , 1983 .

[14]  Jean-Marie Dufour,et al.  Instrument endogeneity and identification-robust tests: Some analytical results , 2008 .

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

[16]  H. White,et al.  Instrumental Variables Regression with Independent Observations , 1982 .

[17]  Donald B. Rubin,et al.  Bayesian Inference for Causal Effects: The Role of Randomization , 1978 .

[18]  J. Sargan.  THE ESTIMATION OF ECONOMIC RELATIONSHIPS USING INSTRUMENTAL VARIABLES , 1958 .

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

[20]  A. Satorra,et al.  Measurement Error Models , 1988 .

[21]  D. Rubin.  Statistics and Causal Inference: Comment: Which Ifs Have Causal Answers , 1986 .

[22]  Aart C. Kraay.  Instrumental Variables Regressions with Honestly Uncertain Exclusion Restrictions , 2008 .

[23]  Zhiqiang Tan,et al.  Regression and Weighting Methods for Causal Inference Using Instrumental Variables , 2006 .

[24]  Joseph B. Kadane,et al.  A COMMENT ON THE TEST OF OVERIDENTIFYING RESTRICTIONS , 1977 .

[25]  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 .

[26]  Jean-Marie Dufour,et al.  Some Impossibility Theorems in Econometrics with Applications to Structural and Dynamic Models , 1997 .

[27]  L. Haddad,et al.  Effects of Agricultural Commercialization on Land Tenure, Household Resource Allocation, and Nutrition in the Philippines , 1990 .

[28]  Takamitsu Sawa,et al.  DISTRIBUTIONS OF ESTIMATES OF COEFFICIENTS OF A SINGLE EQUATION IN A SIMULTANEOUS SYSTEM AND THEIR , 1973 .

[29]  J. Wooldridge.  On two stage least squares estimation of the average treatment effect in a random coefficient model , 1997 .

[30]  David Card,et al.  Using Geographic Variation in College Proximity to Estimate the Return to Schooling , 1993 .

[31]  D. Boos.  On Generalized Score Tests , 1992 .

[32]  Christopher R. Taber,et al.  Generalized Method of Moments , 2020, Time Series Analysis.

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

[34]  J. Angrist,et al.  Two-Stage Least Squares Estimation of Average Causal Effects in Models with Variable Treatment Intensity , 1995 .

[35]  Frank Kleibergen,et al.  Generalizing weak instrument robust IV statistics towards multiple parameters, unrestricted covariance matrices and identification statistics , 2007 .

[36]  Jonathan H. Wright,et al.  A Survey of Weak Instruments and Weak Identification in Generalized Method of Moments , 2002 .

[37]  Thomas J. Kane,et al.  Labor Market Returns to Two- and Four-Year Colleges: Is a Credit a Credit and Do Degrees Matter? , 1993 .