Randomization Tests for Weak Null Hypotheses in Randomized Experiments
Open accessAbstract
The Fisher randomization test (FRT) is appropriate for any test statistic, under a sharp null hypothesis that can recover all missing potential outcomes. However, it is often sought after to test a weak null hypothesis that the treatment does not affect the units on average. To use the FRT for a weak null hypothesis, we must address two issues. First, we need to impute the missing potential outcomes although the weak null hypothesis cannot determine all of them. Second, we need to choose a proper test statistic. For a general weak null hypothesis, we propose an approach to imputing missing potential outcomes under a compatible sharp null hypothesis. Building on this imputation scheme, we advocate a studentized statistic. The resulting FRT has multiple desirable features. First, it is model-free. Second, it is finite-sample exact under the sharp null hypothesis that we use to impute the potential outcomes. Third, it conservatively controls large-sample Type I error under the weak null hypothesis of interest. Therefore, our FRT is agnostic to the treatment effect heterogeneity. We establish a unified theory for general factorial experiments and extend it to stratified and clustered experiments. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.
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?
Randomization inference yields valid p-values for two null hypotheses: finite-sample exact inference on the sharp null of no treatment effect on all individuals, and asymptotically valid inference on the null hypothesis of no average treatment effect.
“Note that randomization inference yields valid p-values for two null hypotheses.First, it provides finite-sample exact inference on the sharp null of no treatment effect on all individuals.Second, when the sharp null hypothesis is incorrect (e.g., some units are impacted positively while others negatively), randomization inference still provides asymptotically valid inference on the null hypothesi”
From Can Restorative Justice Conferencing Reduce Recidivism? Evidence From the Make-it-Right Program (2021) · cites this paper as Wu and Ding (2020)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Can Restorative Justice Conferencing Reduce Recidivism? Evidence From the Make-it-Right Program
Shem-Tov, Y., Raphael, S., & Skog, A. (2021) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w29150 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
- Authors
- Wu, J., & Ding, P.
- Venue
- Taylor & Francis
- Publisher
- Taylor & Francis
- Published
- 2020
- OpenAlex
- W6958100610
- Cited by
- 51
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 6.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- figshare.com
- Licence
- Locations
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Figshare (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Keywords
- studentized statistics, model-free inference, type I error control, treatment effect heterogeneity, factorial design
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