IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/causin/v11y2023i1p27n1004.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Precise unbiased estimation in randomized experiments using auxiliary observational data

Author

Listed:
  • Gagnon-Bartsch Johann A.

    (Department of Statistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United Sates)

  • Sales Adam C.

    (Department of Mathematical Sciences, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, Massachusetts, United Sates)

  • Wu Edward

    (Biocomplexity Institute, Social and Decision Analytics Division, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United Sates)

  • Botelho Anthony F.

    (College of Education, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United Sates)

  • Erickson John A.

    (Analytics and Information Systems, Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY 42101, United States)

  • Miratrix Luke W.

    (Graduate School of Education, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States)

  • Heffernan Neil T.

    (Department of Computer Science, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, Massachusetts, United Sates)

Abstract

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) admit unconfounded design-based inference – randomization largely justifies the assumptions underlying statistical effect estimates – but often have limited sample sizes. However, researchers may have access to big observational data on covariates and outcomes from RCT nonparticipants. For example, data from A/B tests conducted within an educational technology platform exist alongside historical observational data drawn from student logs. We outline a design-based approach to using such observational data for variance reduction in RCTs. First, we use the observational data to train a machine learning algorithm predicting potential outcomes using covariates and then use that algorithm to generate predictions for RCT participants. Then, we use those predictions, perhaps alongside other covariates, to adjust causal effect estimates with a flexible, design-based covariate-adjustment routine. In this way, there is no danger of biases from the observational data leaking into the experimental estimates, which are guaranteed to be exactly unbiased regardless of whether the machine learning models are “correct” in any sense or whether the observational samples closely resemble RCT samples. We demonstrate the method in analyzing 33 randomized A/B tests and show that it decreases standard errors relative to other estimators, sometimes substantially.

Suggested Citation

  • Gagnon-Bartsch Johann A. & Sales Adam C. & Wu Edward & Botelho Anthony F. & Erickson John A. & Miratrix Luke W. & Heffernan Neil T., 2023. "Precise unbiased estimation in randomized experiments using auxiliary observational data," Journal of Causal Inference, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-27.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:causin:v:11:y:2023:i:1:p:27:n:1004
    DOI: 10.1515/jci-2022-0011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/jci-2022-0011
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/jci-2022-0011?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rothe, Christoph, 2016. "The Value of Knowing the Propensity Score for Estimating Average Treatment Effects," IZA Discussion Papers 9989, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Kuanhao Jiang & Rajarshi Mukherjee & Subhabrata Sen & Pragya Sur, 2022. "A New Central Limit Theorem for the Augmented IPW Estimator: Variance Inflation, Cross-Fit Covariance and Beyond," Papers 2205.10198, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2022.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xingyu Chen & Lin Liu & Rajarshi Mukherjee, 2024. "Method-of-Moments Inference for GLMs and Doubly Robust Functionals under Proportional Asymptotics," Papers 2408.06103, arXiv.org.
    2. Liu, Lin & Mukherjee, Rajarshi & Robins, James M., 2024. "Assumption-lean falsification tests of rate double-robustness of double-machine-learning estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 240(2).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:causin:v:11:y:2023:i:1:p:27:n:1004. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.