Bounding a Matching Estimator: The Case of a Norwegian Training Program

By A. Aakvik. 2001

325 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c7064720624de711ee6e4ae94d5eee423085d671

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Flexible Fiscal Rules and Countercyclical Fiscal Policy (2016, result): “…from Rosenbaum sensitivity tests hover between 1.2 and 3, large enough levels compared to the findings in the literature (Rosenbaum, 2002; and Aakvik, 2001).15 Appendix 9 shows the results obtained using a probit model augmented to account for possible covariates of investment-friendly…”
New Evidence on the Effects of Job Creation Schemes in Germany - a Matching Approach with Threefold Heterogeneity (2004, unknown): “Aakvik (2001) notes that the MH-test can be used to test for no treatment effect both within different strata of the sample and as a weighted average between strata.”
Mhbounds - Sensitivity Analysis for Average Treatment Effects (2007, unknown): “For binary outcomes, Aakvik (2001) suggests using the Mantel and Haenszel (MH, 1959) test statistic.”
Sensitivity Analysis for Average Treatment Effects (2007, methodology): “ Aakvik (2001) notes that the MH test can be used to test for no treatment effect both within different strata of the sample and as a weighted average between strata.”
Evaluating Anti-Poverty Programs (2005, background): “Under certain conditions, bounds can be established to a matching estimator, allowing for an omitted covariate of program placement (Rosenbaum, 1995; for an example see Aakvik, 2001).”
Estimating treatment effects for discrete outcomes when responses to treatment vary: an application to Norwegian vocational rehabilitation programs (2005, methodology): “It can also be viewed as the limit form of the LATE parameter of Imbens and Angrist (1994) and Angrist et al. (2000). A.”
Paper park performance: Mexico's natural protected areas in the 1990s (2015, background): “We calculate Rosenbaum bounds to check the sensitivity of our results to unobserved heterogeneity (Rosenbaum, 2002; Aakvik, 2001).”
Split Samples and Design Sensitivity in Observational Studies (2009, methodology): “For applications, see Aakvik (2001), Diprete and Gangl (2004), and Silber, et al.”
Some Practical Guidance for the Implementation of Propensity Score Matching (2008, methodology): “(For details see Rosenbaum (2002) and Aakvik (2001).”
Does eco-certification have environmental benefits? Organic coffee in Costa Rica (2012, result): “We calculate Rosenbaum bounds to check the sensitivity of our results to the failure of this assumption (Rosenbaum 2002; Aakvik 2001).7 Rosenbaum bounds indicate how strongly unobserved confounding factors would need to influence growers’ decisions to obtain organic certification in order to…”
The Employment Effects of Job Creation Schemes in Germany: A Microeconometric Evaluation (2008, unknown): “Aakvik (2001) suggests to use the Mantel and Haenszel (1959) test statistic, which compares the successful number of persons in the treatment group against the same expected number, given the treatment effect is zero.”
Remittances and Household Expenditure Patterns in Tajikistan: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis (2011, background): “Second, such a sensitivity analysis describes a “worst-case scenario” insofar as it only shows how our treatment effect estimations could be altered by hidden biases, but it does not indicate if these biases exi t (Aakvik, 2001; Becker and Caliendo, 2007).”
The WTO trade effect (2011, background): “See Heckman et al. (1997) for DD estimation based on matching, and Imbens and Wooldridge (2009) and the references therein for other DD approaches.”
Design sensitivity in observational studies (2004, methodology): “For several recent applications of this method of sensitivity analysis, see Aakvik (2001), Li et al. (2001) and Normand et al. (2001).”