Sources of Identifying Information in Evaluation Models
Open accessAbstract
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
Cites
Statistics
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?
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
Identification and estimation of local average treatment effects
Imbens, G. W., & Angrist, J. D. (1994) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/2951620 · Cited by 4,101 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Identification of Causal Effects Using Instrumental Variables
Angrist, J. D., Imbens, G. W., & Rubin, D. B. (1996) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1996.10476902 · Cited by 4,230 · see citing works
Self-citationCausal inference in statistics: An overview
Pearl, J. (2009) · Statistics Surveys · doi:10.1214/09-ss057 · Cited by 2,336 · see citing works
Early Teen Marriage and Future Poverty
Dahl, G. (2005) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w11328 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
- Authors
- Angrist, J., & Imbens, G.
- Affiliations
- National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
- Venue
- National Bureau of Economic Research
- Publisher
- 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
- green
- doi.org
- 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