Introduction to Causal Inference Flashcards

Lecture 4 (33 cards)

1
Q

predictive

A

value or feature of a unit we do not observe

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

causal

A

the causal effect of a treatment on an outcome in the population

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

causal effect

A

a change in some feature of the world Y that WOULD result from a change to some other feature of the world D

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

‘would result’

A

counterfactual comparison between outcome in actual world and outcome in counterfactual world

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

only difference?

A

only difference in worlds is one group gets treated and the other does not

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

treatment notation

A

D

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

For each unit i, we define two potential outcomes corresponding to the control, D= 0 and the treatment states D=1

A

Ydi = Y1i potential outcome for unit i in the treatment state, and Y0i potential outcome for unit i in the control state

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

what are those quantities

A

hypothetical, the POTENTIAL outcomes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Causal effect of the treatment on the outcome for unit i is the difference between its two potential outcomes

A

Ti = Y1i -Y0i

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what happens if in the real world a unit is is assigned to the random state

A

observed outcome will be their potential outcome under the treatment state

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

fundamental problem of causal inference

A

impossible to directly observe the individual treatment effects because we only observe one state of the world

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

how to fix this?

A

take averages

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

ATE

A

treatment effects within a group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

ATE sum

A

E(Y1i - Y0i -> sum of Y1i/N - sum of Y0i/N

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

ATT

A

adding together the potential outcomes for those under treatment and taking an average

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

what are we not calculating?

A

before and after - this is PARALLEL worlds

17
Q

assignment mechanism

A

the procedure that determines what units are selected for treatment

18
Q

examples of assignment mechanisms

A

random assignment, selection on observables, selection on unobservables

19
Q

SUTVA

A

That the observed outcomes are only affected and determined by individual i’s treatment assignment, other observed outcomes are NOT impacted by others treatment assignments

20
Q

What is SUTVA

A

An assumption of causal effect stability

21
Q

what happens if SUTVA is violated?

A

then there are so many different potential outcomes

22
Q

and then…

A

cannot truly understand the causal effect

23
Q

examples of SUTVA violation

A

contagion, testing

24
Q

peer effects

A

the effects of ur peers on ur observed outcome

25
naive estimator for the ATE
comparing observed outcomes of individuals that had treatment to observed outcomes of the control group
26
why is the NAIVE ATE bad?
overestimating the ATE, misleading conclusions
27
Potential issues when naively comparing
1. Correlation is not causation 2. Confounding 3. Reverse causality
28
Confounder satisfies two conditions
Affects whether units are assigned to treatment (Di) and has an effect on the outcome over-and-above it has through its effect on treatment status
29
Reverse causality
Instead of the treatment Di leading to the observed outcome Yi, it is the outcome variable that leads units to be treated
30
Selection bias
changes how those individuals may be chosen to receive treatment
31
thus naive ATT
E[Y1i - Y01|D = 1] - BIAS
32
what happens when you naively compare?
You get the ATT
33