Testing Causal Theories with Learned Proxies

IF 9.7 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Annual Review of Political Science Pub Date : 2022-01-06 DOI:10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-111443
D. Knox, Christopher Lucas, W. Cho
{"title":"Testing Causal Theories with Learned Proxies","authors":"D. Knox, Christopher Lucas, W. Cho","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-111443","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social scientists commonly use computational models to estimate proxies of unobserved concepts, then incorporate these proxies into subsequent tests of their theories. The consequences of this practice, which occurs in over two-thirds of recent computational work in political science, are underappreciated. Imperfect proxies can reflect noise and contamination from other concepts, producing biased point estimates and standard errors. We demonstrate how analysts can use causal diagrams to articulate theoretical concepts and their relationships to estimated proxies, then apply straightforward rules to assess which conclusions are rigorously supportable. We formalize and extend common heuristics for “signing the bias”—a technique for reasoning about unobserved confounding—to scenarios with imperfect proxies. Using these tools, we demonstrate how, in often-encountered research settings, proxy-based analyses allow for valid tests for the existence and direction of theorized effects. We conclude with best-practice recommendations for the rapidly growing literature using learned proxies to test causal theories. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 25 is May 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":"152 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annual Review of Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-111443","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Social scientists commonly use computational models to estimate proxies of unobserved concepts, then incorporate these proxies into subsequent tests of their theories. The consequences of this practice, which occurs in over two-thirds of recent computational work in political science, are underappreciated. Imperfect proxies can reflect noise and contamination from other concepts, producing biased point estimates and standard errors. We demonstrate how analysts can use causal diagrams to articulate theoretical concepts and their relationships to estimated proxies, then apply straightforward rules to assess which conclusions are rigorously supportable. We formalize and extend common heuristics for “signing the bias”—a technique for reasoning about unobserved confounding—to scenarios with imperfect proxies. Using these tools, we demonstrate how, in often-encountered research settings, proxy-based analyses allow for valid tests for the existence and direction of theorized effects. We conclude with best-practice recommendations for the rapidly growing literature using learned proxies to test causal theories. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 25 is May 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
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
用学习代理检验因果理论
社会科学家通常使用计算模型来估计未观察到的概念的代理,然后将这些代理合并到他们理论的后续测试中。这种做法的后果,发生在最近超过三分之二的政治学计算工作中,被低估了。不完美的代理可以反映噪声和其他概念的污染,产生有偏差的点估计和标准误差。我们演示了分析师如何使用因果图来阐明理论概念及其与估计代理的关系,然后应用简单的规则来评估哪些结论是严格支持的。我们将“为偏差签名”(一种对未观察到的混淆进行推理的技术)的常见启发式形式化并扩展到具有不完美代理的场景。使用这些工具,我们展示了在经常遇到的研究设置中,基于代理的分析如何允许对理论化效应的存在和方向进行有效的测试。最后,我们为快速增长的文献提供了最佳实践建议,这些文献使用学习代理来测试因果理论。预计《政治学年度评论》第25卷的最终在线出版日期为2022年5月。修订后的估计数请参阅http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates。
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
CiteScore
15.20
自引率
4.60%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The Annual Review of Political Science has been published since 1998 to provide comprehensive coverage of critical advancements in the field. It encompasses a wide range of subjects within Political Science, such as political theory and philosophy, international relations, political economy, political behavior, American and comparative politics, public administration and policy, and methodology.
期刊最新文献
Latino Opinion and Action in the Struggle for America's Political Future Democratic Norms and the Ethics of Resistance State Policy and Immigrant Integration Global Economic Sanctions Women and Power in the Developing World
×
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