{"title":"Insufficient Statistical Power of the Chi-Square Model Fit Test for the Exclusion Assumption of the Instrumental Variable Method","authors":"Zijun Ke","doi":"10.1007/s40647-024-00414-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Regression estimates are biased when potential confounders are omitted or when there are other similar risks to validity. The instrumental variable (IV) method can be used instead to obtain less biased estimates or to strengthen causal inferences. One key assumption critical to the validity of the IV method is the exclusion assumption, which requires instruments to be correlated with the outcome variable only through endogenous predictors. The chi-square test of model fit is widely used as a diagnostic test for this assumption. Previous simulation studies assessed the power of this diagnostic test only in situations with strong violations of the exclusion assumption. However, low to moderate levels of assumption violation are not uncommon in reality, especially when the exclusion assumption is violated indirectly. In this study, we showed through Monte Carlo simulations that the chi-square model fit test suffered from a severe lack of power (< 30%) to detect violations of the exclusion assumption when the level of violation was of typical size, and the IV causal inferences were severely inaccurate and misleading in this case. We thus advise using the IV method with caution unless there is a chance for thorough assumption diagnostics, like in meta-analyses or experiments.</p>","PeriodicalId":43537,"journal":{"name":"Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences","volume":"238 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1092","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40647-024-00414-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Regression estimates are biased when potential confounders are omitted or when there are other similar risks to validity. The instrumental variable (IV) method can be used instead to obtain less biased estimates or to strengthen causal inferences. One key assumption critical to the validity of the IV method is the exclusion assumption, which requires instruments to be correlated with the outcome variable only through endogenous predictors. The chi-square test of model fit is widely used as a diagnostic test for this assumption. Previous simulation studies assessed the power of this diagnostic test only in situations with strong violations of the exclusion assumption. However, low to moderate levels of assumption violation are not uncommon in reality, especially when the exclusion assumption is violated indirectly. In this study, we showed through Monte Carlo simulations that the chi-square model fit test suffered from a severe lack of power (< 30%) to detect violations of the exclusion assumption when the level of violation was of typical size, and the IV causal inferences were severely inaccurate and misleading in this case. We thus advise using the IV method with caution unless there is a chance for thorough assumption diagnostics, like in meta-analyses or experiments.
如果遗漏了潜在的混杂因素或存在其他类似的有效性风险,回归估计值就会出现偏差。工具变量法(IV)可用于获得偏差较小的估计值或加强因果推断。对 IV 方法有效性至关重要的一个关键假设是排除假设,它要求工具只能通过内生预测因子与结果变量相关。模型拟合度的卡方检验被广泛用作这一假设的诊断检测。以往的模拟研究仅在强烈违反排除假设的情况下评估该诊断检测的有效性。然而,中低度的假设违反在现实中并不少见,尤其是当排除假设被间接违反时。在本研究中,我们通过蒙特卡罗模拟表明,当违反程度达到典型规模时,卡方模型拟合检验严重缺乏检测违反排除假设的能力(< 30%),在这种情况下,IV 因果推断严重不准确并具有误导性。因此,我们建议谨慎使用 IV 方法,除非有机会进行彻底的假设诊断,如在荟萃分析或实验中。
期刊介绍:
Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences (FJHSS) is a peer-reviewed academic journal that publishes research papers across all academic disciplines in the humanities and social sciences. The Journal aims to promote multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary studies, bridge diverse communities of the humanities and social sciences in the world, provide a platform of academic exchange for scholars and readers from all countries and all regions, promote intellectual development in China’s humanities and social sciences, and encourage original, theoretical, and empirical research into new areas, new issues, and new subject matters. Coverage in FJHSS emphasizes the combination of a “local” focus (e.g., a country- or region-specific perspective) with a “global” concern, and engages in the international scholarly dialogue by offering comparative or global analyses and discussions from multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary perspectives. The journal features special topics, special issues, and original articles of general interest in the disciplines of humanities and social sciences. The journal also invites leading scholars as guest editors to organize special issues or special topics devoted to certain important themes, subject matters, and research agendas in the humanities and social sciences.