IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/biomet/v103y2016i4p829-842..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On inverse probability-weighted estimators in the presence of interference

Author

Listed:
  • L. Liu
  • M. G. Hudgens
  • S. Becker-Dreps

Abstract

We consider inference about the causal effect of a treatment or exposure in the presence of interference, i.e., when one individual’s treatment affects the outcome of another individual. In the observational setting where the treatment assignment mechanism is not known, inverse probability-weighted estimators have been proposed when individuals can be partitioned into groups such that there is no interference between individuals in different groups. Unfortunately this assumption, which is sometimes referred to as partial interference, may not hold, and moreover existing weighted estimators may have large variances. In this paper we consider weighted estimators that could be employed when interference is present. We first propose a generalized inverse probability-weighted estimator and two Hájek-type stabilized weighted estimators that allow any form of interference. We derive their asymptotic distributions and propose consistent variance estimators assuming partial interference. Empirical results show that one of the Hájek estimators can have substantially smaller finite-sample variance than the other estimators. The different estimators are illustrated using data on the effects of rotavirus vaccination in Nicaragua.

Suggested Citation

  • L. Liu & M. G. Hudgens & S. Becker-Dreps, 2016. "On inverse probability-weighted estimators in the presence of interference," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 103(4), pages 829-842.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:biomet:v:103:y:2016:i:4:p:829-842.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/biomet/asw047
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Halloran M. Elizabeth & Hudgens Michael G., 2012. "Causal Inference for Vaccine Effects on Infectiousness," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(2), pages 1-40, January.
    2. Charles F. Manski, 2013. "Identification of treatment response with social interactions," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 16(1), pages 1-23, February.
    3. Xi Luo & Dylan S. Small & Chiang-Shan R. Li & Paul R. Rosenbaum, 2012. "Inference With Interference Between Units in an fMRI Experiment of Motor Inhibition," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 107(498), pages 530-541, June.
    4. Carolina Perez-Heydrich & Michael G. Hudgens & M. Elizabeth Halloran & John D. Clemens & Mohammad Ali & Michael E. Emch, 2014. "Assessing effects of cholera vaccination in the presence of interference," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 70(3), pages 731-741, September.
    5. VanderWeele, Tyler J. & Tchetgen Tchetgen, Eric J., 2011. "Effect partitioning under interference in two-stage randomized vaccine trials," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 81(7), pages 861-869, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yi Zhang & Kosuke Imai, 2023. "Individualized Policy Evaluation and Learning under Clustered Network Interference," Papers 2311.02467, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    2. Zhaonan Qu & Ruoxuan Xiong & Jizhou Liu & Guido Imbens, 2021. "Semiparametric Estimation of Treatment Effects in Observational Studies with Heterogeneous Partial Interference," Papers 2107.12420, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    3. Denis Fougère & Nicolas Jacquemet, 2020. "Policy Evaluation Using Causal Inference Methods," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-03455978, HAL.
    4. Georgia Papadogeorgou & Kosuke Imai & Jason Lyall & Fan Li, 2022. "Causal inference with spatio‐temporal data: Estimating the effects of airstrikes on insurgent violence in Iraq," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 84(5), pages 1969-1999, November.
    5. Shaina J. Alexandria & Michael G. Hudgens & Allison E. Aiello, 2023. "Assessing intervention effects in a randomized trial within a social network," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 1409-1419, June.
    6. Brian J. Reich & Shu Yang & Yawen Guan & Andrew B. Giffin & Matthew J. Miller & Ana Rappold, 2021. "A Review of Spatial Causal Inference Methods for Environmental and Epidemiological Applications," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 89(3), pages 605-634, December.
    7. Joseph Puleo & Ashley Buchanan & Natallia Katenka & M. Elizabeth Halloran & Samuel R. Friedman & Georgios Nikolopoulos, 2024. "Assessing Spillover Effects of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder on HIV Risk Behaviors among a Network of People Who Inject Drugs," Stats, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-27, June.
    8. Sujatro Chakladar & Samuel Rosin & Michael G. Hudgens & M. Elizabeth Halloran & John D. Clemens & Mohammad Ali & Michael E. Emch, 2022. "Inverse probability weighted estimators of vaccine effects accommodating partial interference and censoring," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(2), pages 777-788, June.
    9. Anish Agarwal & Sarah H. Cen & Devavrat Shah & Christina Lee Yu, 2022. "Network Synthetic Interventions: A Causal Framework for Panel Data Under Network Interference," Papers 2210.11355, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    10. Elizabeth L. Ogburn & Ilya Shpitser & Youjin Lee, 2020. "Causal inference, social networks and chain graphs," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(4), pages 1659-1676, October.
    11. Das, Tirthatanmoy & Polachek, Solomon, 2022. "The Econometrics of Antidotal Variables," IZA Discussion Papers 15558, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Lan Liu & Eric Tchetgen Tchetgen, 2022. "Regression‐based negative control of homophily in dyadic peer effect analysis," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(2), pages 668-678, June.
    13. Michael P. Leung & Pantelis Loupos, 2022. "Graph Neural Networks for Causal Inference Under Network Confounding," Papers 2211.07823, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.

    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. A. Giffin & B. J. Reich & S. Yang & A. G. Rappold, 2023. "Generalized propensity score approach to causal inference with spatial interference," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 2220-2231, September.
    2. Denis Fougère & Nicolas Jacquemet, 2020. "Policy Evaluation Using Causal Inference Methods," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03455978, HAL.
    3. David Choi, 2017. "Estimation of Monotone Treatment Effects in Network Experiments," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(519), pages 1147-1155, July.
    4. Kosuke Imai & Zhichao Jiang, 2020. "Identification and sensitivity analysis of contagion effects in randomized placebo‐controlled trials," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(4), pages 1637-1657, October.
    5. Anish Agarwal & Sarah H. Cen & Devavrat Shah & Christina Lee Yu, 2022. "Network Synthetic Interventions: A Causal Framework for Panel Data Under Network Interference," Papers 2210.11355, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    6. H. Spencer Banzhaf, 2021. "Difference-in-Differences Hedonics," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(8), pages 2385-2414.
    7. Supriya Tiwari & Pallavi Basu, 2024. "Quasi-randomization tests for network interference," Papers 2403.16673, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2024.
    8. Yann Bramoullé & Habiba Djebbari & Bernard Fortin, 2020. "Peer Effects in Networks: A Survey," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 603-629, August.
    9. Giovanni Cerulli, 2014. "ntreatreg: a Stata module for estimation of treatment effects in the presence of neighborhood interactions," United Kingdom Stata Users' Group Meetings 2014 15, Stata Users Group.
    10. Gibbons, Steve & Overman, Henry G. & Patacchini, Eleonora, 2015. "Spatial Methods," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 115-168, Elsevier.
    11. Brian J. Reich & Shu Yang & Yawen Guan & Andrew B. Giffin & Matthew J. Miller & Ana Rappold, 2021. "A Review of Spatial Causal Inference Methods for Environmental and Epidemiological Applications," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 89(3), pages 605-634, December.
    12. Julius Owusu, 2023. "Randomization Inference of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects under Network Interference," Papers 2308.00202, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    13. Hao, Shiming, 2021. "True structure change, spurious treatment effect? A novel approach to disentangle treatment effects from structure changes," MPRA Paper 108679, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Aibo Gong, 2021. "Bounds for Treatment Effects in the Presence of Anticipatory Behavior," Papers 2111.06573, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2022.
    15. Joseph Puleo & Ashley Buchanan & Natallia Katenka & M. Elizabeth Halloran & Samuel R. Friedman & Georgios Nikolopoulos, 2024. "Assessing Spillover Effects of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder on HIV Risk Behaviors among a Network of People Who Inject Drugs," Stats, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-27, June.
    16. Jinglong Zhao, 2024. "Experimental Design For Causal Inference Through An Optimization Lens," Papers 2408.09607, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2024.
    17. Rainone, Edoardo, 2020. "The network nature of over-the-counter interest rates," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    18. Han, Kevin & Basse, Guillaume & Bojinov, Iavor, 2024. "Population interference in panel experiments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 238(1).
    19. Susan Athey & Dean Eckles & Guido W. Imbens, 2018. "Exact p-Values for Network Interference," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(521), pages 230-240, January.
    20. Debopam Bhattacharya & Pascaline Dupas & Shin Kanaya, 2013. "Estimating the Impact of Means-tested Subsidies under Treatment Externalities with Application to Anti-Malarial Bednets," Economics Series Working Papers 646, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.

    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:oup:biomet:v:103:y:2016:i:4:p:829-842.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/biomet .

    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.