On the Nuisance of Control Variables in Causal Regression Analysis

Paul Hünermund, Beyers Louw
{"title":"On the Nuisance of Control Variables in Causal Regression Analysis","authors":"Paul Hünermund, Beyers Louw","doi":"10.1177/10944281231219274","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Control variables are included in regression analyses to estimate the causal effect of a treatment on an outcome. In this article, we argue that the estimated effect sizes of controls are unlikely to have a causal interpretation themselves, though. This is because even valid controls are possibly endogenous and represent a combination of several different causal mechanisms operating jointly on the outcome, which is hard to interpret theoretically. Therefore, we recommend refraining from interpreting the marginal effects of controls and focusing on the main variables of interest, for which a plausible identification argument can be established. To prevent erroneous managerial or policy implications, coefficients of control variables should be clearly marked as not having a causal interpretation or omitted from regression tables altogether. Moreover, we advise against using control variable estimates for subsequent theory building and meta-analyses.","PeriodicalId":507528,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Research Methods","volume":"33 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Research Methods","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10944281231219274","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Control variables are included in regression analyses to estimate the causal effect of a treatment on an outcome. In this article, we argue that the estimated effect sizes of controls are unlikely to have a causal interpretation themselves, though. This is because even valid controls are possibly endogenous and represent a combination of several different causal mechanisms operating jointly on the outcome, which is hard to interpret theoretically. Therefore, we recommend refraining from interpreting the marginal effects of controls and focusing on the main variables of interest, for which a plausible identification argument can be established. To prevent erroneous managerial or policy implications, coefficients of control variables should be clearly marked as not having a causal interpretation or omitted from regression tables altogether. Moreover, we advise against using control variable estimates for subsequent theory building and meta-analyses.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
论因果回归分析中控制变量的滋扰
在回归分析中加入控制变量是为了估计治疗对结果的因果效应。但在本文中,我们认为控制变量的估计效应大小本身不太可能具有因果解释。这是因为,即使是有效的对照组也可能是内生的,代表了几种不同的因果机制共同作用于结果的组合,这很难从理论上进行解释。因此,我们建议不要对控制因素的边际效应进行解释,而将注意力集中在主要的相关变量上,因为对这些变量可以进行合理的识别论证。为防止产生错误的管理或政策影响,应明确指出控制变量的系数不具有因果解释作用,或从回归表中完全省略。此外,我们建议不要将控制变量的估计值用于后续的理论构建和元分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Mixed-Keying or Desirability-Matching in the Construction of Forced-Choice Measures? An Empirical Investigation and Practical Recommendations Building a Bigger Toolbox: The Construct Validity of Existing and Proposed Measures of Careless Responding to Cognitive Ability Tests Mixed-Keying or Desirability-Matching in the Construction of Forced-Choice Measures? An Empirical Investigation and Practical Recommendations Building a Bigger Toolbox: The Construct Validity of Existing and Proposed Measures of Careless Responding to Cognitive Ability Tests Confounding Effects of Insufficient Effort Responding Across Survey Sources: The Case of Personality Predicting Performance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1