gov 51 randomized experiments
play

Gov 51: Randomized Experiments Matthew Blackwell Harvard - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Gov 51: Randomized Experiments Matthew Blackwell Harvard University 1 / 10 Changing minds on gay marriage Question: can we efgectively persuade people to change their minds? Hugely important question for political campaigns,


  1. Gov 51: Randomized Experiments Matthew Blackwell Harvard University 1 / 10

  2. Changing minds on gay marriage • Question: can we efgectively persuade people to change their minds? • Hugely important question for political campaigns, companies, etc. • Psychological studies show it isn’t easy. • Contact Hypothesis : outgroup hostility diminished when people from difgerent groups interact with one another. • Today we’ll explore this question the context of support for gay marriage and contact with a member of the LGBT community. • 𝑍 • 𝑈 2 / 10 𝑗 = support for gay marriage (1) or not (0) 𝑗 = contact with member of LGBT community (1) or not (0)

  3. Causal efgects & counterfactuals • 𝑍 outcomes is observable. • Fundamental problem of causal inference : only one of the two potential 𝑗 (0) 𝑗 (1) − 𝑍 • Causal efgect for citizen 𝑗 : 𝑍 with a member of the LGBT community? 𝑗 (0) : would 𝑗 have supported gay marriage if they didn’t have contact member of the LGBT community? • What does “ 𝑈 𝑗 (1) : would 𝑗 have supported gay marriage if they had contact with a • 𝑍 • Two potential outcomes : member of the LGBT community? • Would citizen 𝑗 have supported gay marriage if they had contact with a 3 / 10 𝑗 ” mean? ⇝ counterfactuals , “what if” 𝑗 causes 𝑍

  4. Sigma notation 𝑜 𝑜 • Σ 𝑜 𝑜 𝑍 𝑗=1 ∑ • We will often refer to the sample size (number of units) as 𝑜 . • Notation is a bit clunky, so we often use the Sigma notation : 𝑜 𝑍 • We often want sums: how many in our sample support gay marriage? 𝑜 ) 2 , … , 𝑍 1 , 𝑍 • We often have 𝑜 measurements of some variable: (𝑍 4 / 10 1 + 𝑍 2 + 𝑍 3 + ⋯ + 𝑍 𝑗 = 𝑍 1 + 𝑍 2 + 𝑍 3 + ⋯ + 𝑍 𝑗=1 means sum each value from 𝑍 1 to 𝑍

  5. Averages • The sample average or sample mean is simply the sum of all values divided by the number of values. • Sigma notation allows us to write this in a compact way: 𝑜 𝑜 ∑ 𝑗=1 𝑍 𝑗 • Suppose we surveyed 6 people and 3 supported gay marriage: 5 / 10 𝑍 = 1 𝑍 = 1 6 (1 + 1 + 1 + 0 + 0 + 0) = 0.5

  6. Quantity of interest • We want to estimate the average causal efgects over all units: • When will the difgerence-in-means is a good estimate of the SATE? • 𝑍 control : observed average outcome for control group • What we can estimate instead: • Why can’t we just calculate this quantity directly? 𝑗 (0)} 𝑗 (1) − 𝑍 {𝑍 𝑗=1 ∑ 𝑜 𝑜 6 / 10 Sample Average Treatment Efgect (SATE) = 1 Difgerence in means = 𝑍 treated − 𝑍 control • 𝑍 treated : observed average outcome for treated group

  7. Randomized control trials (RCT) • Control group ≈ what would have happened to treatment group if they 𝑗 (0) 𝑜 1 • Randomized control trial : each unit’s treatment assignment is had taken control. • Similar on both observable and unobservable characteristics. • Treatment and control group are identical on average • Randomization ensures balance between treatment and control group. • Flip a coin; draw red and blue chips from a hat; etc determined by chance. 7 / 10 • 𝑍 control ≈ 𝑗=1 𝑍 𝑜 ∑ • 𝑍 treated − 𝑍 control ≈ SATE

  8. Some potential problems with RCTs • Placebo efgects : • Respondents will be afgected by any intervention, even if they shouldn’t have any efgect. • Hawthorne efgects : • Respondents act difgerently just knowing that they are under study. 8 / 10

  9. Balance checking • Can we determine if randomization “worked”? • If it did, we shouldn’t see large difgerences between treatment and control group on pretreatment variable . • Pretreatment variable are those that are unafgected by treatment. • We can check in the actual data for some pretreatment variable 𝑌 9 / 10 • 𝑌 treated : average value of variable for treated group. • 𝑌 control : average value of variable for control group. • Under randomization, 𝑌 treated − 𝑌 control ≈ 0

  10. Multiple treatments • Instead of 1 treatment, we might have multiple treatment arms : • Control condition • Treatment A • Treatment B • Treatment C, etc • In this case, we will look at multiple comparisons: • If treatment arms are randomly assigned, these difgerences will be good estimators for each causal contrast. 10 / 10 • 𝑍 treated, A − 𝑍 control • 𝑍 treated, B − 𝑍 control • 𝑍 treated, A − 𝑍 treated, B

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend