EconBase
← All papers

Treatment Effects with Targeting Instruments

Sokbae Lee, Bernard Salanié

arXiv 20 Jul 2020 · Econometrics

arXiv:2007.10432 · PDF · Extracted main text

Abstract

Multivalued treatments are commonplace in applications. We explore the use of discrete-valued instruments to control for selection bias in this setting. Our discussion revolves around the concept of targeting: which instruments target which treatments. It allows us to establish conditions under which counterfactual averages and treatment effects are point- or partially-identified for composite complier groups. We illustrate the usefulness of our framework by applying it to data from the Head Start Impact Study. Under a plausible positive selection assumption, we derive informative bounds that suggest less beneficial effects of Head Start expansions than the parametric estimates of Kline and Walters (2016).

Citation extraction

60
references
133
in-text mentions
61
distinct cited
3
self-citations
18,807
main-text words

appendix boundary found by appendix_command · 67% of the source is main text. Read the extracted text to check this.

Most heavily cited references

The works this paper leans on most, across its whole bibliography — not restricted to papers in our corpus. Ranked by composite intensity, which combines how often a work is mentioned, how many sections mention it, and how much of that falls in the main text rather than the appendix.

ReferenceIntensityMentionsSectionsMain text
1Kline and Walters (2016) Evaluating public programs with close substitutes: The case of Head Start0.96026488%
2Kirkeboen, Leuven, and Mogstad (2016) Field of study, earnings, and self-selection0.9416483%
3Heckman and Pinto (2018) Unordered Monotonicity0.92815580%
4Bai, Huang, and Tabord-Meehan (2025) Sharp Testable Implications of Encouragement Designs0.92843100%
5Heckman and Vytlacil (2007) Econometric Evaluation of Social Programs, Part II: Using the Marginal Treatment Effect to Organize Alternative Econometric Esti…0.87452100%
6Mogstad, Torgovitsky, and Walters (2021) The Causal Interpretation of Two-Stage Least Squares with Multiple Instrumental Variables0.84333100%
7Angrist and Imbens (1995) Two-stage least squares estimation of average causal effects in models with variable treatment intensity0.84333100%
8Pinto (2022) Beyond Intention to Treat: Using the Incentives in Moving to Opportunity to Identify Neighborhood Effects0.7547343%
9Bai, Huang, Moon, Shaikh, and Vytlacil (2024) On the Identifying Power of Monotonicity for Average Treatment Effects0.73732100%
10Angrist, Santos, and Tecchio (2025) One Instrument, Many Treatments: Instrumental Variables Identification of Multiple Causal Effects0.64422100%

Showing the top 10 of 61 scored citations.

Cited by, within the corpus

arXiv econ.EM papers that cite this one, ranked by how heavily they lean on it.

Citing paperIntensityMentionsSections
1On the falsification of instrumental variable models for heterogeneous treatment effects0.79465
2On the Identifying Power of Generalized Monotonicity for Average Treatment Effects0.675135
3Sharp Testable Implications of Encouragement Designs0.64422
4When does IV identification not restrict outcomes?0.40511
5Inference for Treatment Effects Conditional on Generalized Principal Strata using Instrumental Variables0.40511