Practical propensity score matching: A reply to Smith and Todd

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This paper discusses propensity score matching in the context of Smith and Todd's (Does matching overcome Lalonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators, J. Econom., in press) reanalysis of Dehejia and Wahba (J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 97 (1999) 1053; National Bereau of Economics Research working Paper No. 6829, Rev. Econom. Statist., 2002, forthcoming). Propensity score methods require that a separate propensity score specification be estimated for each treatment group-comparison group combination. Furthermore, a researcher should always examine the sensitivity of the estimated treatment effect to small changes in the propensity score specification; this is a useful diagnostic on the quality of the comparison group. When these are borne in mind, propensity score methods are useful in analyzing all of the subsamples of the NSW data considered in Smith and Todd (Does matching overcome Lalonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators, J. Econom., in press).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)355-364
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Econometrics
Volume125
Issue number1-2 SPEC. ISS.
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2005

Fingerprint

Propensity Score
Specification
Estimator
Treatment Effects
Diagnostics
Propensity score matching
Propensity score
Economics

Keywords

  • Causal inference
  • Labor training
  • Non-experimental methods
  • Program evaluation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Economics and Econometrics
  • Finance
  • Statistics and Probability

Cite this

Practical propensity score matching : A reply to Smith and Todd. / Dehejia, Rajeev.

In: Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 125, No. 1-2 SPEC. ISS., 03.2005, p. 355-364.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{5ad6ddaba1fd4f0fbdb8817758165b25,
title = "Practical propensity score matching: A reply to Smith and Todd",
abstract = "This paper discusses propensity score matching in the context of Smith and Todd's (Does matching overcome Lalonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators, J. Econom., in press) reanalysis of Dehejia and Wahba (J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 97 (1999) 1053; National Bereau of Economics Research working Paper No. 6829, Rev. Econom. Statist., 2002, forthcoming). Propensity score methods require that a separate propensity score specification be estimated for each treatment group-comparison group combination. Furthermore, a researcher should always examine the sensitivity of the estimated treatment effect to small changes in the propensity score specification; this is a useful diagnostic on the quality of the comparison group. When these are borne in mind, propensity score methods are useful in analyzing all of the subsamples of the NSW data considered in Smith and Todd (Does matching overcome Lalonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators, J. Econom., in press).",
keywords = "Causal inference, Labor training, Non-experimental methods, Program evaluation",
author = "Rajeev Dehejia",
year = "2005",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.jeconom.2004.04.012",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "125",
pages = "355--364",
journal = "Journal of Econometrics",
issn = "0304-4076",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "1-2 SPEC. ISS.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Practical propensity score matching

T2 - A reply to Smith and Todd

AU - Dehejia, Rajeev

PY - 2005/3

Y1 - 2005/3

N2 - This paper discusses propensity score matching in the context of Smith and Todd's (Does matching overcome Lalonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators, J. Econom., in press) reanalysis of Dehejia and Wahba (J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 97 (1999) 1053; National Bereau of Economics Research working Paper No. 6829, Rev. Econom. Statist., 2002, forthcoming). Propensity score methods require that a separate propensity score specification be estimated for each treatment group-comparison group combination. Furthermore, a researcher should always examine the sensitivity of the estimated treatment effect to small changes in the propensity score specification; this is a useful diagnostic on the quality of the comparison group. When these are borne in mind, propensity score methods are useful in analyzing all of the subsamples of the NSW data considered in Smith and Todd (Does matching overcome Lalonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators, J. Econom., in press).

AB - This paper discusses propensity score matching in the context of Smith and Todd's (Does matching overcome Lalonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators, J. Econom., in press) reanalysis of Dehejia and Wahba (J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 97 (1999) 1053; National Bereau of Economics Research working Paper No. 6829, Rev. Econom. Statist., 2002, forthcoming). Propensity score methods require that a separate propensity score specification be estimated for each treatment group-comparison group combination. Furthermore, a researcher should always examine the sensitivity of the estimated treatment effect to small changes in the propensity score specification; this is a useful diagnostic on the quality of the comparison group. When these are borne in mind, propensity score methods are useful in analyzing all of the subsamples of the NSW data considered in Smith and Todd (Does matching overcome Lalonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators, J. Econom., in press).

KW - Causal inference

KW - Labor training

KW - Non-experimental methods

KW - Program evaluation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=10044298710&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=10044298710&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jeconom.2004.04.012

DO - 10.1016/j.jeconom.2004.04.012

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:10044298710

VL - 125

SP - 355

EP - 364

JO - Journal of Econometrics

JF - Journal of Econometrics

SN - 0304-4076

IS - 1-2 SPEC. ISS.

ER -