IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2311.08963.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Incorporating Preferences Into Treatment Assignment Problems

Author

Listed:
  • Daido Kido

Abstract

This study investigates the problem of individualizing treatment allocations using stated preferences for treatments. If individuals know in advance how the assignment will be individualized based on their stated preferences, they may state false preferences. We derive an individualized treatment rule (ITR) that maximizes welfare when individuals strategically state their preferences. We also show that the optimal ITR is strategy-proof, that is, individuals do not have a strong incentive to lie even if they know the optimal ITR a priori. Constructing the optimal ITR requires information on the distribution of true preferences and the average treatment effect conditioned on true preferences. In practice, the information must be identified and estimated from the data. As true preferences are hidden information, the identification is not straightforward. We discuss two experimental designs that allow the identification: strictly strategy-proof randomized controlled trials and doubly randomized preference trials. Under the presumption that data comes from one of these experiments, we develop data-dependent procedures for determining ITR, that is, statistical treatment rules (STRs). The maximum regret of the proposed STRs converges to zero at a rate of the square root of the sample size. An empirical application demonstrates our proposed STRs.

Suggested Citation

  • Daido Kido, 2023. "Incorporating Preferences Into Treatment Assignment Problems," Papers 2311.08963, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2311.08963
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2311.08963
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Toru Kitagawa & Aleksey Tetenov, 2018. "Who Should Be Treated? Empirical Welfare Maximization Methods for Treatment Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(2), pages 591-616, March.
    2. Burt S. Barnow & Coady Wing & M. H. Clark, 2017. "What Can We Learn From A Doubly Randomized Preference Trial?—An Instrumental Variables Perspective," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(2), pages 418-437, March.
    3. Eric Mbakop & Max Tabord‐Meehan, 2021. "Model Selection for Treatment Choice: Penalized Welfare Maximization," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(2), pages 825-848, March.
    4. Kojima, Fuhito & Manea, Mihai, 2010. "Incentives in the probabilistic serial mechanism," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 106-123, January.
    5. Keisuke Hirano & Jack R. Porter, 2009. "Asymptotics for Statistical Treatment Rules," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(5), pages 1683-1701, September.
    6. Roshni Sahoo & Stefan Wager, 2022. "Policy Learning with Competing Agents," Papers 2204.01884, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    7. Long, Qi & Little, Roderick J. & Lin, Xihong, 2008. "Causal Inference in Hybrid Intervention Trials Involving Treatment Choice," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103, pages 474-484, June.
    8. Toru Kitagawa, 2015. "A Test for Instrument Validity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83(5), pages 2043-2063, September.
    9. Charles F. Manski, 2004. "Statistical Treatment Rules for Heterogeneous Populations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(4), pages 1221-1246, July.
    10. Aytek Erdil & Haluk Ergin, 2008. "What's the Matter with Tie-Breaking? Improving Efficiency in School Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(3), pages 669-689, June.
    11. Keegan Harris & Anish Agarwal & Chara Podimata & Zhiwei Steven Wu, 2022. "Strategyproof Decision-Making in Panel Data Settings and Beyond," Papers 2211.14236, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    12. Haluk I. Ergin, 2002. "Efficient Resource Allocation on the Basis of Priorities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(6), pages 2489-2497, November.
    13. Erdil, Aytek, 2014. "Strategy-proof stochastic assignment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 146-162.
    14. Janevic, Mary R. & Janz, Nancy K. & Dodge, Julia A. & Lin, Xihong & Pan, Wenqin & Sinco, Brandy R. & Clark, Noreen M., 2003. "The role of choice in health education intervention trials: a review and case study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(7), pages 1581-1594, April.
    15. Evan Munro, 2020. "Treatment Allocation with Strategic Agents," Papers 2011.06528, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    16. Alvin E. Roth, 1982. "The Economics of Matching: Stability and Incentives," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 617-628, November.
    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. Takanori Ida & Takunori Ishihara & Koichiro Ito & Daido Kido & Toru Kitagawa & Shosei Sakaguchi & Shusaku Sasaki, 2022. "Choosing Who Chooses: Selection-Driven Targeting in Energy Rebate Programs," NBER Working Papers 30469, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Takanori Ida & Takunori Ishihara & Koichiro Ito & Daido Kido & Toru Kitagawa & Shosei Sakaguchi & Shusaku Sasaki, 2021. "Paternalism, Autonomy, or Both? Experimental Evidence from Energy Saving Programs," Papers 2112.09850, arXiv.org.
    3. Manski, Charles F., 2023. "Probabilistic prediction for binary treatment choice: With focus on personalized medicine," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 234(2), pages 647-663.
    4. Eric Mbakop & Max Tabord‐Meehan, 2021. "Model Selection for Treatment Choice: Penalized Welfare Maximization," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(2), pages 825-848, March.
    5. Han, Xiang, 2024. "On the efficiency and fairness of deferred acceptance with single tie-breaking," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    6. Kojima, Fuhito, 2013. "Efficient resource allocation under multi-unit demand," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 1-14.
    7. Kesten, Onur & Unver, Utku, 2015. "A theory of school choice lotteries," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(2), May.
    8. Susan Athey & Stefan Wager, 2021. "Policy Learning With Observational Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 133-161, January.
    9. Shosei Sakaguchi, 2021. "Estimation of Optimal Dynamic Treatment Assignment Rules under Policy Constraints," Papers 2106.05031, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2024.
    10. Charles F. Manski, 2021. "Econometrics for Decision Making: Building Foundations Sketched by Haavelmo and Wald," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(6), pages 2827-2853, November.
    11. Thomas M. Russell, 2020. "Policy Transforms and Learning Optimal Policies," Papers 2012.11046, arXiv.org.
    12. Kesten, Onur & Kurino, Morimitsu, 2019. "Strategy-proof improvements upon deferred acceptance: A maximal domain for possibility," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 120-143.
    13. Huber, Martin, 2019. "An introduction to flexible methods for policy evaluation," FSES Working Papers 504, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    14. Erdil, Aytek, 2014. "Strategy-proof stochastic assignment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 146-162.
    15. Yuya Sasaki & Takuya Ura, 2020. "Welfare Analysis via Marginal Treatment Effects," Papers 2012.07624, arXiv.org.
    16. Daido Kido, 2023. "Locally Asymptotically Minimax Statistical Treatment Rules Under Partial Identification," Papers 2311.08958, arXiv.org.
    17. Davide Viviano & Jelena Bradic, 2020. "Fair Policy Targeting," Papers 2005.12395, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2022.
    18. Anders Bredahl Kock & David Preinerstorfer, 2024. "Regularizing Discrimination in Optimal Policy Learning with Distributional Targets," Papers 2401.17909, arXiv.org.
    19. Toru Kitagawa & Guanyi Wang, 2021. "Who should get vaccinated? Individualized allocation of vaccines over SIR network," CeMMAP working papers CWP28/21, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    20. Tang, Qianfeng & Yu, Jingsheng, 2014. "A new perspective on Kesten's school choice with consent idea," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 543-561.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:arx:papers:2311.08963. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.