Cited by 72Advanced Causal Inference TechniquesEvaluation and Performance AssessmentPoverty, Education, and Child Welfare

Sources of Identifying Information in Evaluation Models

Open access
Angrist, Joshua, Imbens, Guido·1991·National Bureau of Economic Research

Abstract

The average effect of social programs on outcomes such as earnings is a parameter of primary interest in econometric evaluations studies.New results on using exclusion restrictions to identify and estimate average treatment effects are presented.Identification is achieved given a minimum of parametric assumptions initially without reference to a latent index framework.Most econometric analyses of evaluation models motivate identifying assumptions using models of individual behavior.Our technical conditions do not fit easily into a conventional discrete choice framework, rather they fit into a framework where the source of identifyimg infonnation is institutional knowledge regarding program administration.This framework also suggests an attractive experimental design for research using human subjects, in which eligible participants need not be denied treatment.We present a simple instrumental variables estimator for the average effect of treatment on program participants, and show that the estimator attains Chamberlain's semi-parametric efficiency bound.The bias of estimators that satisfy only exclusion restrictions is also considered.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3386/t0117

Cites

1 of 1 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?

  • A broader class of nonlinear functions f_X and f_Y may render the causal effect identifiable.

    “Angrist and Imbens (1991) have shown that a broader class of nonlinear functions f X and f Y may render the causal effect identifiable.”

    From Causal inference in statistics: An overview (2009) · cites this paper as Angrist and Imbens (1991)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Angrist, J., & Imbens, G.
Affiliations
National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
Venue
National Bureau of Economic Research
Published
1991-12
OpenAlex
W1585327923
Cited by
72
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
Type
report
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • National Bureau of Economic Research (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Research portal (Tilburg University) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
  • Other publications TiSEM (submittedVersion)
Funders
Universiteit van Tilburg
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Poverty, Education, and Child Welfare
Keywords
program evaluation, average treatment effect, exclusion restriction, identification, instrumental variables, program management, human subjects research, social programs, earnings

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