Unpacking the Black Box of Causality: Learning about Causal Mechanisms from Experimental and Observational Studies
Tóm tắt
Identifying causal mechanisms is a fundamental goal of social science. Researchers seek to study not only whether one variable affects another but also how such a causal relationship arises. Yet commonly used statistical methods for identifying causal mechanisms rely upon untestable assumptions and are often inappropriate even under those assumptions. Randomizing treatment and intermediate variables is also insufficient. Despite these difficulties, the study of causal mechanisms is too important to abandon. We make three contributions to improve research on causal mechanisms. First, we present a minimum set of assumptions required under standard designs of experimental and observational studies and develop a general algorithm for estimating causal mediation effects. Second, we provide a method for assessing the sensitivity of conclusions to potential violations of a key assumption. Third, we offer alternative research designs for identifying causal mechanisms under weaker assumptions. The proposed approach is illustrated using media framing experiments and incumbency advantage studies.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Collier, 2004, Rethinking Social Inquiry:Diverse Tools, Shared Standards
Brady, 2004, Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards
Kinder, 1996, Divided by Color: Racial Politics and Democratic Ideals
Robins, 2010, Causality and Psychopathology: Finding the Determinants of Disorders and Their Cures, 103
Imai K. , and Yamamoto T. . 2011. “Sensitivity Analysis for Causal Mediation Effects under Alternative Exogeneity Assumptions.” http://imai.princeton.edu/research/medsens.html. (accessed September 1, 2011).
Imai K. , Tingley D. , and Yamamoto T. . N.d. “Experimental Designs for Identifying Causal Mechanisms.” (With discussions). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A (Statistics in Society). Forthcoming.
Jacobson, 1987, The Politics of Congressional Elections
Glynn A. N. 2010. “The Product and Difference Fallacies for Indirect Effects.” Department of Government, Harvard University. Unpublished manuscript, Mimeo.
Imai K. , and Tingley D. . N.d. “A Statistical Method for Empirical Testing of Competing Theories.” American Journal of Political Science. Forthcoming.
MacKinnon, 2008, Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis
Rosenbaum, 2002, Covariance Adjustment in Randomized Experiments and Observational Studies: Rejoinder, Statistical Science, 17, 321, 10.1214/ss/1042727942
Shadish, 2001, Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference
Manski, 2007, Identification for Prediction and Decision
Rosenbaum, 2002, Covariance Adjustment in Randomized Experiments and Observational Studies (with Discussion), Statistical Science, 17, 286, 10.1214/ss/1042727942
Pearl J. N.d. “The Causal Mediation Formula: A Guide to the Assessment of Pathways and Mechanisms.” Prevention Science. Forthcoming.
Druckman, 2005, Media Matter: How Newspapers and Television News Cover Campaigns and Influence Voters, American Political Science Review, 22, 463
Pearl, 2001, Proceedings of the Seventeenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 411
Imai K. , Keele L. , Tingley D. , and Yamamoto T. . 2011. “Replication Data for: Unpacking the Black Box of Causality: Learning about Causal Mechanisms from Experimental and Observational Studies.” The Dataverse Network. hdl:1902.1/16467 (accessed September 1, 2011).