The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Phantom Menace: Omitted Variable Bias in Econometric Research
Abstract
Quantitative political science is awash in control variables. The justification for these bloated specifications is usually the fear of omitted variable bias. A key underlying assumption is that the danger posed by omitted variable bias can be ameliorated by the inclusion of relevant control variables. Unfortunately, as this article demonstrates, there is nothing in the mathematics of regression analysis that supports this conclusion. The inclusion of additional control variables may increase or decrease the bias, and we cannot know for sure which is the case in any particular situation. A brief discussion of alternative strategies for achieving experimental control follows the main result.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Yet, determining which combination(s) of variables to blind is non-trivial and the risk of omitted variable bias should not be downplayed [71,160].”
From Fairness in machine learning: A survey (2024) · cites this paper as [71]
In the citing paper
“Yet, determining which combination(s) of variables to blind is non-trivial and the risk of omitted variable bias should not be downplayed [71,160].”
From Fairness in machine learning: A survey (2024) · cites this paper as [71]
Citations
Cites
Estimating the Dimension of a Model
Schwarz, G. (1978) · The Annals of Statistics · doi:10.1214/aos/1176344136 · Cited by 47,033
(2012) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.102.2.i · Cited by 14,047
Sims, C. A. (1980) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1912017 · Cited by 12,841
Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research
King, G., Keohane, R. O., & Verba, S. (1994) · Princeton University Press · doi:10.1515/9781400821211 · Cited by 7,225
Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-Nested Hypotheses
Vuong, Q. H. (1989) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1912557 · Cited by 5,929
Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science
Feigl, H., & Scriven, M. S. (1956) · Cited by 4,420
Mallows, C. L. (1995) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1995.10484370 · Cited by 2,622
Statistical Methods for Social Scientists
(1977) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2009-0-22083-6 · Cited by 1,880
INADMISSIBILITY OF THE USUAL ESTIMATOR FOR THE MEAN OF A MULTIVARIATE NORMAL DISTRIBUTION
Stein, C. M. (1956) · doi:10.1525/9780520313880-018 · Cited by 1,875
Normative and Structural Causes of Democratic Peace, 1946–1986
Maoz, Z., & Russett, B. M. (1993) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/2938740 · Cited by 1,536
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Achen, C.H., 2005, Conflict Management and Peace Science, 22
- Akaike, H., Second International Symposium of Information Theory
- Cox, D.R., 1961, Proceedings of the Fourth Berkeley Symposium, 105
- Greene, W.H., 2003, Econometric aanalysis
- Johnston, J., 1997, Econometric methods
- Kadera, K.M., 2005, Conflict Management and Peace Science, 22
- Maddala, G.S., 1977, Econometrics
- Mallows, C.L., 1973, Technometrics, 15, 671
- Welch, F., 1975, American Economic Review, 65, 63
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learning
Mehrabi, N., Morstatter, F., Saxena, N., Lerman, K., & Galstyan, A. (2022) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3457607 · Cited by 5,812
“Omitted variable bias4 occurs when one or more important variables are left out of the model [38, 114, 131].”
BackgroundA Tale of Two Cultures: Contrasting Quantitative and Qualitative Research
Mahoney, J., & Goertz, G. (2006) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mpj017 · Cited by 904
Gartzke, E. A. (2007) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00244.x · Cited by 794
Sensitivity Analysis of Empirical Results on Civil War Onset
Hegre, H., & Sambanis, N. (2006) · Journal of Conflict Resolution · doi:10.1177/0022002706289303 · Cited by 1,286
Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science
Druckman, J. N. (2011) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511921452 · Cited by 622
Metadata
- Authors
- Clarke, K. A.
- Affiliations
- University of Rochester (US)
- Corresponding author
- Clarke, Kevin A.
- ORCID
- Clarke, Kevin A.
- Venue
- Conflict Management and Peace Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-09
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 341-352
- ISSN
- 0738-8942 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-9219
- OpenAlex
- W2146807455
- Cited by
- 484
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 58 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 32
- FWCI
- 11.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Conflict Management and Peace Science (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Science Research and Education
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Spatial and Panel Data Analysis
- Keywords
- omitted variable bias, control variables, regression analysis, specification bias, experimental control, econometric methodology, political science research
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
