Definition and identification of causal ratio effects.

IF 7.6 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Psychological methods Pub Date : 2024-12-12 DOI:10.1037/met0000711
Christoph Kiefer, Benedikt Lugauer, Axel Mayer
{"title":"Definition and identification of causal ratio effects.","authors":"Christoph Kiefer, Benedikt Lugauer, Axel Mayer","doi":"10.1037/met0000711","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In generalized linear models, the effect of a treatment or intervention is often expressed as a ratio (e.g., risk ratio and odds ratio). There is discussion about when ratio effect measures can be interpreted in a causal way. For example, ratio effect measures suffer from noncollapsibility, that is, even in randomized experiments, the average over individual ratio effects is not identical to the (unconditional) ratio effect based on group means. Even more, different ratio effect measures (e.g., simple ratio and odds ratio) can point into different directions regarding the effectiveness of the treatment making it difficult to decide which one is the causal effect of interest. While causality theories do in principle allow for ratio effects, the literature lacks a comprehensive derivation and definition of ratio effect measures and their possible identification from a causal perspective (including, but not restricted to randomized experiments). In this article, we show how both simple ratios and odds ratios can be defined based on the stochastic theory of causal effects. Then, we examine if and how expectations of these effect measures can be identified under four causality conditions. Finally, we discuss an alternative computation of ratio effects as ratios of causally unbiased expectations instead of expectations of individual ratios, which is identifiable under all causality conditions and consistent with difference effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20782,"journal":{"name":"Psychological methods","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological methods","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000711","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In generalized linear models, the effect of a treatment or intervention is often expressed as a ratio (e.g., risk ratio and odds ratio). There is discussion about when ratio effect measures can be interpreted in a causal way. For example, ratio effect measures suffer from noncollapsibility, that is, even in randomized experiments, the average over individual ratio effects is not identical to the (unconditional) ratio effect based on group means. Even more, different ratio effect measures (e.g., simple ratio and odds ratio) can point into different directions regarding the effectiveness of the treatment making it difficult to decide which one is the causal effect of interest. While causality theories do in principle allow for ratio effects, the literature lacks a comprehensive derivation and definition of ratio effect measures and their possible identification from a causal perspective (including, but not restricted to randomized experiments). In this article, we show how both simple ratios and odds ratios can be defined based on the stochastic theory of causal effects. Then, we examine if and how expectations of these effect measures can be identified under four causality conditions. Finally, we discuss an alternative computation of ratio effects as ratios of causally unbiased expectations instead of expectations of individual ratios, which is identifiable under all causality conditions and consistent with difference effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Psychological methods
Psychological methods PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
13.10
自引率
7.10%
发文量
159
期刊介绍: Psychological Methods is devoted to the development and dissemination of methods for collecting, analyzing, understanding, and interpreting psychological data. Its purpose is the dissemination of innovations in research design, measurement, methodology, and quantitative and qualitative analysis to the psychological community; its further purpose is to promote effective communication about related substantive and methodological issues. The audience is expected to be diverse and to include those who develop new procedures, those who are responsible for undergraduate and graduate training in design, measurement, and statistics, as well as those who employ those procedures in research.
期刊最新文献
A guided tutorial on linear mixed-effects models for the analysis of accuracies and response times in experiments with fully crossed design. Bayes factors for logistic (mixed-effect) models. Better power by design: Permuted-subblock randomization boosts power in repeated-measures experiments. Building a simpler moderated nonlinear factor analysis model with Markov Chain Monte Carlo estimation. Definition and identification of causal ratio effects.
×
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