Cited by 167Advanced Causal Inference TechniquesSurvey Sampling and Estimation TechniquesStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials

General Forms of Finite Population Central Limit Theorems with Applications to Causal Inference

Open access
Li, Xinran, Ding, Peng·2017·Journal of the American Statistical Association

Abstract

Frequentists’ inference often delivers point estimators associated with confidence intervals or sets for parameters of interest. Constructing the confidence intervals or sets requires understanding the sampling distributions of the point estimators, which, in many but not all cases, are related to asymptotic Normal distributions ensured by central limit theorems. Although previous literature has established various forms of central limit theorems for statistical inference in super population models, we still need general and convenient forms of central limit theorems for some randomization-based causal analyses of experimental data, where the parameters of interests are functions of a finite population and randomness comes solely from the treatment assignment. We use central limit theorems for sample surveys and rank statistics to establish general forms of the finite population central limit theorems that are particularly useful for proving asymptotic distributions of randomization tests under the sharp null hypothesis of zero individual causal effects, and for obtaining the asymptotic repeated sampling distributions of the causal effect estimators. The new central limit theorems hold for general experimental designs with multiple treatment levels, multiple treatment factors and vector outcomes, and are immediately applicable for studying the asymptotic properties of many methods in causal inference, including instrumental variable, regression adjustment, rerandomization, cluster-randomized experiments, and so on. Previously, the asymptotic properties of these problems are often based on heuristic arguments, which in fact rely on general forms of finite population central limit theorems that have not been established before. Our new theorems fill this gap by providing more solid theoretical foundation for asymptotic randomization-based causal inference. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01621459.2017.1295865

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Randomization inference yields valid p-values for two null hypotheses: finite-sample exact inference on the sharp null of no treatment effect on all individuals, and asymptotically valid inference on the null hypothesis of no average treatment effect.

    “Note that randomization inference yields valid p-values for two null hypotheses.First, it provides finite-sample exact inference on the sharp null of no treatment effect on all individuals.Second, when the sharp null hypothesis is incorrect (e.g., some units are impacted positively while others negatively), randomization inference still provides asymptotically valid inference on the null hypothesi”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, X., & Ding, P.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
Corresponding author
Ding, Peng
Venue
Journal of the American Statistical Association
Published
2017-10-02
Volume
112
Issue
520
Pages
1759-1769
ISSN
  • 0162-1459 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-274X
OpenAlex
W2533232082
Cited by
167
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1
FWCI
8.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of the American Statistical Association (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Figshare (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Survey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Keywords
permutation tests, asymptotic distribution, sample surveys, rank statistics, superpopulation model, re-randomization, instrumental variables, regression adjustment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review