The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Imposing Moment Restrictions from Auxiliary Data by Weighting
Abstract
In this paper we analyze the estimation of coefficients in regression models under moment restrictions in which the moment restrictions are derived from auxiliary data. The moment restrictions yield weights for each observation that can subsequently be used in weighted regression analysis. We discuss the interpretation of these weights under two assumptions: that the target population (from which the moments are constructed) and the sampled population (from which the sample is drawn) are the same, and that these populations differ. We present an application based on omitted ability bias in estimation of wage regressions. The National Longitudinal Survey Young Men's Cohort (NLS)—in addition to containing information for each observation on wages, education, and experience—records data on two test scores that may be considered proxies for ability. The NLS is a small dataset, however, with a high attrition rate. We investigate how to mitigate these problems in the NLS by forming moments from the joint distribution of education, experience, and log wages in the 1% sample of the 1980 U.S. Census and using these moments to construct weights for weighted regression analysis of the NLS. We analyze the impacts of our weighted regression techniques on the estimated coefficients and standard errors of returns to education and experience in the NLS controlling for ability, with and without the assumption that the NLS and the Census samples are random samples from the same population.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Deming, W. E., & Stephan, F. F. (1940) · The Annals of Mathematical Statistics · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177731829 · Cited by 1,537
Cited by
Hainmueller, J. (2012) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mpr025 · Cited by 6,026
Efficient Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Using the Estimated Propensity Score
Hirano, K., Imbens, G. W., & Ridder, G. (2003) · Econometrica · doi:10.1111/1468-0262.00442 · Cited by 2,355
Self-citationCovariate Balancing Propensity Score
Imai, K., & Ratkovic, M. (2014) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/rssb.12027 · Cited by 1,315
Site Selection Bias in Program Evaluation *
Allcott, H. (2015) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1093/qje/qjv015 · Cited by 426
Adjusting for selection bias in retrospective, case-control studies
Geneletti, S., Richardson, S., & Best, N. (2008) · Biostatistics · doi:10.1093/biostatistics/kxn010 · Cited by 174
Metadata
- Authors
- Hellerstein, J. K., & Imbens, G. W.
- Venue
- Review of Economics and Statistics
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 1999-02
- Volume
- 81
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-14
- ISSN
- 0034-6535 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-9142
- OpenAlex
- W3124116943
- Cited by
- 163
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Imposing Moment Restrictions from Auxiliary Data by Weighting. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/003465399557860
- The paper
- Hellerstein, J. K., & Imbens, G. W. (1999). Imposing Moment Restrictions from Auxiliary Data by Weighting. Review of Economics and Statistics. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465399557860
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.