Volume 78, Issue 3
Original Article

Randomization inference for treatment effect variation

Peng Ding

Harvard University, Cambridge, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Avi Feller

Corresponding Author

Harvard University, Cambridge, USA

Address for correspondence: Avi Feller, Department of Statistics, Harvard University, 1 Oxford Street, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA. E‐mail: avifeller@fas.harvard.eduSearch for more papers by this author
Luke Miratrix

Harvard University, Cambridge, USA

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 07 July 2015
Citations: 23

Summary

Applied researchers are increasingly interested in whether and how treatment effects vary in randomized evaluations, especially variation that is not explained by observed covariates. We propose a model‐free approach for testing for the presence of such unexplained variation. To use this randomization‐based approach, we must address the fact that the average treatment effect, which is generally the object of interest in randomized experiments, actually acts as a nuisance parameter in this setting. We explore potential solutions and advocate for a method that guarantees valid tests in finite samples despite this nuisance. We also show how this method readily extends to testing for heterogeneity beyond a given model, which can be useful for assessing the sufficiency of a given scientific theory. We finally apply our method to the National Head Start impact study, which is a large‐scale randomized evaluation of a Federal preschool programme, finding that there is indeed significant unexplained treatment effect variation.

Number of times cited according to CrossRef: 23

  • Ridge rerandomization: An experimental design strategy in the presence of covariate collinearity, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 10.1016/j.jspi.2020.07.002, 211, (287-314), (2021).
  • Randomized Experiments in Education, with Implications for Multilevel Causal Inference, Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application, 10.1146/annurev-statistics-031219-041205, 7, 1, (177-208), (2020).
  • Social comparison nudges without monetary incentives: Evidence from home energy reports, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 10.1016/j.jeem.2020.102315, (102315), (2020).
  • Nonparametric Tests for Treatment Effect Heterogeneity With Duration Outcomes, Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 10.1080/07350015.2020.1737080, (1-17), (2020).
  • Randomization Tests for Weak Null Hypotheses in Randomized Experiments, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 10.1080/01621459.2020.1750415, (1-16), (2020).
  • Sampling‐based Randomised Designs for Causal Inference under the Potential Outcomes Framework, International Statistical Review, 10.1111/insr.12339, 88, 1, (101-121), (2019).
  • Randomization Tests that Condition on Non-Categorical Covariate Balance, Journal of Causal Inference, 10.1515/jci-2018-0004, 0, 0, (2019).
  • Heterogeneous Subgroup Identification in Observational Studies, Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 10.1080/19345747.2019.1615159, (1-19), (2019).
  • Covariance Regression Models for Studying Treatment Effect Heterogeneity Across One or More Outcomes: Understanding How Treatments Shape Inequality, Sociological Methods & Research, 10.1177/0049124119882449, (004912411988244), (2019).
  • Generalizing from Survey Experiments Conducted on Mechanical Turk: A Replication Approach, Political Science Research and Methods, 10.1017/psrm.2018.10, 7, 3, (613-628), (2018).
  • Decomposing Treatment Effect Variation, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 10.1080/01621459.2017.1407322, 114, 525, (304-317), (2018).
  • Migration policy: did an emergency provision displace standard rules? Evidence from Italy, Economia Politica, 10.1007/s40888-018-0128-0, 35, 3, (863-893), (2018).
  • Inference for instrumental variables: a randomization inference approach, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 10.1111/rssa.12353, 181, 4, (1231-1254), (2018).
  • On mitigating the analytical limitations of finely stratified experiments, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 10.1111/rssb.12290, 80, 5, (1035-1056), (2018).
  • The Landscape of Causal Inference: Perspective From Citation Network Analysis, The American Statistician, 10.1080/00031305.2017.1360794, 72, 3, (265-277), (2018).
  • A randomization-based perspective on analysis of variance: a test statistic robust to treatment effect heterogeneity, Biometrika, 10.1093/biomet/asx059, 105, 1, (45-56), (2017).
  • Discovering effect modification in an observational study of surgical mortality at hospitals with superior nursing, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 10.1111/rssa.12298, 181, 2, (535-546), (2017).
  • Principal Score Methods: Assumptions, Extensions, and Practical Considerations, Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 10.3102/1076998617719726, 42, 6, (726-758), (2017).
  • Can Variation in Subgroups' Average Treatment Effects Explain Treatment Effect Heterogeneity? Evidence from a Social Experiment, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 10.1162/REST_a_00662, 99, 4, (683-697), (2017).
  • Targeted or Universal Coverage? Assessing Heterogeneity in the Effects of Universal Child Care, Journal of Labor Economics, 10.1086/690652, 35, 3, (609-653), (2017).
  • At the Nexus of Observational and Experimental Research: Theory, Specification, and Analysis of Experiments with Heterogeneous Treatment Effects, Political Behavior, 10.1007/s11109-016-9379-z, 39, 4, (789-815), (2016).
  • Perils and potentials of self‐selected entry to epidemiological studies and surveys, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 10.1111/rssa.12136, 179, 2, (319-376), (2016).
  • Nonparametric Tests for Treatment Effect Heterogeneity with Duration Outcomes, SSRN Electronic Journal, 10.2139/ssrn.2881661, (2016).