arXiv 5 Jun 2024 · Econometrics
arXiv:2406.02835 · PDF · DOI · OpenAlex · Extracted main text
Many identification results in instrumental variables (IV) models hold without requiring any restrictions on the distribution of potential outcomes, or how those outcomes are correlated with selection behavior. This enables IV models to allow for arbitrary heterogeneity in treatment effects and the possibility of selection on gains in the outcome. I provide a necessary and sufficient condition for treatment effects to be point identified in a manner that does not restrict outcomes, when the instruments take a finite number of values. The condition generalizes the well-known LATE monotonicity assumption, and unifies a wide variety of other known IV identification results. The result also yields a brute-force approach to reveal all selection models that allow for point identification of treatment effects without restricting outcomes, and then enumerate all of the identified parameters within each such selection model. The search uncovers new selection models that yield identification, provides impossibility results for others, and offers opportunities to relax assumptions on selection used in existing literature. An application considers the identification of complementarities between two cross-randomized treatments, obtaining a necessary and sufficient condition on selection for local average complementarities among compliers to be identified in a manner that does not restrict outcomes. I use this result to revisit two empirical settings, one in which the data are incompatible with this restriction on selection, and another in which the data are compatible with the restriction.
appendix boundary found by appendix_command · 36% of the source is main text. Read the extracted text to check this.
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.
| Reference | Intensity | Mentions | Sections | Main text | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Blackwell, Matthew (2017) Instrumental Variable Methods for Conditional Effects and Causal Interaction in Voter Mobilization Experiments | 0.950 | 7 | 3 | 86% |
| 2 | Bai, Yuehao, Huang, Shunzhuang, Moon, Sarah, Shaikh, Azeem M., Vytla… (2024) On the Identifying Power of Monotonicity for Average Treatment Effects | 0.843 | 5 | 3 | 60% |
| 3 | Navjeevan, Manu, Pinto, Rodrigo, Santos, Andres (2023) Identification and Estimation in a Class of Potential Outcomes Models | 0.843 | 5 | 3 | 60% |
| 4 | Imbens, Guido W, Angrist, Joshua D (1994) Identification and Estimation of Local Average Treatment Effects | 0.822 | 9 | 5 | 56% |
| 5 | Angelucci, Manuela, Bennett, Daniel (2024) The Economic Impact of Depression Treatment in India: Evidence from Community-Based Provision of Pharmacotherapy | 0.788 | 15 | 2 | 73% |
| 6 | (2013) Estimation in an Instrumental Variables Model With Treatment Effect Heterogeneity | 0.737 | 5 | 3 | 40% |
| 7 | Kirkeboen, Lars J., Leuven, Edwin, Mogstad, Magne (2016) Field of Study, Earnings, and Self-Selection* | 0.737 | 3 | 3 | 67% |
| 8 | Heckman, James J., Pinto, Rodrigo (2018) Unordered Monotonicity | 0.693 | 6 | 5 | 33% |
| 9 | Comey, Matthew L., Eng, Amanda R., Pei, Zhuan (2023) Supercompliers | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
| 10 | (2017) Tolerating defiance? Local average treatment effects without monotonicity | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
Showing the top 10 of 57 scored citations.
arXiv econ.EM papers that cite this one, ranked by how heavily they lean on it.