IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2311.17575.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Identifying Causal Effects of Discrete, Ordered and ContinuousTreatments using Multiple Instrumental Variables

Author

Listed:
  • Nadja van 't Hoff

Abstract

Inferring causal relationships from observational data is often challenging due to endogeneity. This paper provides new identification results for causal effects of discrete, ordered and continuous treatments using multiple binary instruments. The key contribution is the identification of a new causal parameter that has a straightforward interpretation with a positive weighting scheme and is applicable in many settings due to a mild monotonicity assumption. This paper further leverages recent advances in causal machine learning for both estimation and the detection of local violations of the underlying monotonicity assumption. The methodology is applied to estimate the returns to education and assess the impact of having an additional child on female labor market outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Nadja van 't Hoff, 2023. "Identifying Causal Effects of Discrete, Ordered and ContinuousTreatments using Multiple Instrumental Variables," Papers 2311.17575, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2024.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2311.17575
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2311.17575
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Victor Chernozhukov & Denis Chetverikov & Mert Demirer & Esther Duflo & Christian Hansen & Whitney Newey & James Robins, 2018. "Double/debiased machine learning for treatment and structural parameters," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 21(1), pages 1-68, February.
    2. Sokbae Lee & Bernard Salanié, 2018. "Identifying Effects of Multivalued Treatments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(6), pages 1939-1963, November.
    3. Helmut Farbmacher & Raphael Guber & Sven Klaassen, 2022. "Instrument Validity Tests With Causal Forests," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(2), pages 605-614, April.
    4. Pedro Carneiro & James J. Heckman & Edward J. Vytlacil, 2011. "Estimating Marginal Returns to Education," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2754-2781, October.
    5. Klein, Tobias J., 2010. "Heterogeneous treatment effects: Instrumental variables without monotonicity?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 155(2), pages 99-116, April.
    6. Ismael Mourifié & Yuanyuan Wan, 2017. "Testing Local Average Treatment Effect Assumptions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(2), pages 305-313, May.
    7. Stefan Wager & Susan Athey, 2018. "Estimation and Inference of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects using Random Forests," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(523), pages 1228-1242, July.
    8. Imbens, Guido W & Angrist, Joshua D, 1994. "Identification and Estimation of Local Average Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(2), pages 467-475, March.
    9. James J. Heckman & Sergio Urzua & Edward Vytlacil, 2006. "Understanding Instrumental Variables in Models with Essential Heterogeneity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(3), pages 389-432, August.
    10. Orazio P. Attanasio & Vincenzo Di Maro & Marcos Vera‐Hernández, 2013. "Community Nurseries and the Nutritional Status of Poor Children. Evidence from Colombia," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 123, pages 1025-1058, September.
    11. Jack Mountjoy, 2022. "Community Colleges and Upward Mobility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(8), pages 2580-2630, August.
    12. Martin Huber & Lukas Laffers & Giovanni Mellace, 2017. "Sharp IV Bounds on Average Treatment Effects on the Treated and Other Populations Under Endogeneity and Noncompliance," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(1), pages 56-79, January.
    13. Magne Mogstad & Alexander Torgovitsky & Christopher R. Walters, 2021. "The Causal Interpretation of Two-Stage Least Squares with Multiple Instrumental Variables," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(11), pages 3663-3698, November.
    14. Martin Huber & Giovanni Mellace, 2015. "Testing Instrument Validity for LATE Identification Based on Inequality Moment Constraints," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(2), pages 398-411, May.
    15. Kitagawa, Toru, 2021. "The identification region of the potential outcome distributions under instrument independence," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 225(2), pages 231-253.
    16. Joshua D. Angrist & Kathryn Graddy & Guido W. Imbens, 2000. "The Interpretation of Instrumental Variables Estimators in Simultaneous Equations Models with an Application to the Demand for Fish," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 67(3), pages 499-527.
    17. Brigham Frandsen & Lars Lefgren & Emily Leslie, 2023. "Judging Judge Fixed Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(1), pages 253-277, January.
    18. Martin E Andresen & Martin Huber, 2021. "Instrument-based estimation with binarised treatments: issues and tests for the exclusion restriction," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 24(3), pages 536-558.
    19. Toru Kitagawa, 2015. "A Test for Instrument Validity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83(5), pages 2043-2063, September.
    20. Vinicius J. B. Martins & Telma M. M. Toledo Florêncio & Luciane P. Grillo & Maria Do Carmo P. Franco & Paula A. Martins & Ana Paula G. Clemente & Carla D. L. Santos & Maria de Fatima A. Vieira & Ana L, 2011. "Long-Lasting Effects of Undernutrition," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-30, May.
    21. Abadie A., 2002. "Bootstrap Tests for Distributional Treatment Effects in Instrumental Variable Models," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 97, pages 284-292, March.
    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. Huber Martin & Wüthrich Kaspar, 2019. "Local Average and Quantile Treatment Effects Under Endogeneity: A Review," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-27, January.
    2. Bhuller, Manudeep & Sigstad, Henrik, 2024. "2SLS with multiple treatments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 242(1).
    3. Sun, Zhenting, 2023. "Instrument validity for heterogeneous causal effects," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 237(2).
    4. Kédagni, Désiré, 2023. "Identifying treatment effects in the presence of confounded types," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 234(2), pages 479-511.
    5. Mario Fiorini & Katrien Stevens, 2021. "Scrutinizing the Monotonicity Assumption in IV and fuzzy RD designs," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 83(6), pages 1475-1526, December.
    6. Huber, Martin & Wüthrich, Kaspar, 2017. "Evaluating local average and quantile treatment effects under endogeneity based on instruments: a review," FSES Working Papers 479, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    7. Evan K. Rose & Yotam Shem-Tov, 2021. "On Recoding Ordered Treatments as Binary Indicators," Papers 2111.12258, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    8. Thomas Carr & Toru Kitagawa, 2021. "Testing Instrument Validity with Covariates," Papers 2112.08092, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    9. Leonard Goff, 2024. "When does IV identification not restrict outcomes?," Papers 2406.02835, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2024.
    10. Humlum, Anders & Munch, Jakob R. & Rasmussen, Mette, 2023. "What Works for the Unemployed? Evidence from Quasi-Random Caseworker Assignments," IZA Discussion Papers 16033, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Joshua D. Angrist, 2022. "Empirical Strategies in Economics: Illuminating the Path From Cause to Effect," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(6), pages 2509-2539, November.
    12. Claudia Noack, 2021. "Sensitivity of LATE Estimates to Violations of the Monotonicity Assumption," Papers 2106.06421, arXiv.org.
    13. Manu Navjeevan & Rodrigo Pinto & Andres Santos, 2023. "Identification and Estimation in a Class of Potential Outcomes Models," Papers 2310.05311, arXiv.org.
    14. Guber, Raphael, 2018. "Instrument Validity Tests with Causal Trees: With an Application to the Same-sex Instrument," MEA discussion paper series 201805, Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA) at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.
    15. Patrick Kline & Christopher R. Walters, 2019. "On Heckits, LATE, and Numerical Equivalence," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(2), pages 677-696, March.
    16. Robert A. Moffitt & Matthew V. Zahn, 2019. "The Marginal Labor Supply Disincentives of Welfare: Evidence from Administrative Barriers to Participation," NBER Working Papers 26028, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Bartalotti, Otávio & Kédagni, Désiré & Possebom, Vitor, 2023. "Identifying marginal treatment effects in the presence of sample selection," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 234(2), pages 565-584.
    18. Kitagawa, Toru, 2021. "The identification region of the potential outcome distributions under instrument independence," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 225(2), pages 231-253.
    19. Xintong Wang & Alfonso Flores-Lagunes, 2022. "Conscription and Military Service: Do They Result in Future Violent and Nonviolent Incarcerations and Recidivism?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 57(5), pages 1715-1757.
    20. Hans Fricke & Markus Frölich & Martin Huber & Michael Lechner, 2020. "Endogeneity and non‐response bias in treatment evaluation – nonparametric identification of causal effects by instruments," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(5), pages 481-504, August.

    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:2311.17575. 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.