Sensitivity to Missing Data Assumptions: Theory and an Evaluation of the U.S. Wage Structure
Open accessAbstract
This paper develops methods for assessing the sensitivity of empirical conclusions regarding conditional distributions to departures from the missing at random (MAR) assumption.We index the degree of nonignorable selection governing the missing data process by the maximal Kolmogorov-Smirnov distance between the distributions of missing and observed outcomes across all values of the covariates.Sharp bounds on minimum mean square approximations to conditional quantiles are derived as a function of the nominal level of selection considered in the sensitivity analysis and a weighted bootstrap procedure is developed for conducting inference.Using these techniques, we conduct an empirical assessment of the sensitivity of observed earnings patterns in U.S. Census data to deviations from the MAR assumption.We find that the well documented increase in the returns to schooling between 1980 and 1990 is relatively robust to deviations from the missing at random assumption except at the lowest quantiles of the distribution, but that conclusions regarding heterogeneity in returns and changes in the returns function between 1990 and 2000 are very sensitive to departures from ignorability.
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?
Similar breakdown concepts appear in the partial identification settings of Horowitz and Manski (1995), Kline and Santos (2013), Manski and Pepper (2018), and Masten and Poirier (2020).
“similar”
From A More Credible Approach to Parallel Trends (2023) · cites this paper as Kline and Santos (2013)
Cites
Shadow Prices, Market Wages, and Labor Supply
Heckman, J. (1974) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1913937 · Cited by 1,852 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A More Credible Approach to Parallel Trends
Rambachan, A., & Roth, J. (2023) · Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1093/restud/rdad018 · Cited by 1,559 · see citing works
- Authors
- Kline, P., & Santos, A.
- Affiliations
- National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
- University of California San Diego (US)
- Venue
- Quantitative Economics
- Publisher
- The Econometric Society
- Published
- 2013-07
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 231-267
- ISSN
- 1759-7323 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1492151992
- Cited by
- 58
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 3.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Quantitative Economics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Econstor (Econstor) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Labor market dynamics and wage inequality
- Keywords
- sensitivity analysis, wage distribution, returns to education, conditional quantiles, Kolmogorov-Smirnov distance, weighted bootstrap, selection bias
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