Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Propensity Score Matching and Prevention Science

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Preventing Crime and Violence

Part of the book series: Advances in Prevention Science ((Adv. Prevention Science))

Abstract

Although the strongest evidence in prevention science comes from well-designed and faithfully implemented randomized control trials, sometimes randomization is not feasible and sometimes randomized control trials do not unfold as planned. This chapter reviews standards of evidence in prevention science, discusses how research can fall short of these standards, and suggests ways propensity score matching can fill the gaps. It then presents the propensity score matching framework and contemporary best practices, followed by an empirical example and a discussion of future directions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abadie, A., & Imbens, G. W. (2006). Large sample properties of matching estimators for average treatment effects. Econometrica, 74, 235–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abadie, A., & Imbens, G. W. (2008). On the failure of the bootstrap for matching estimators. Econometrica, 76, 1537–1557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Kabbani, N. S. (2001). The dropout process in life course perspective: Early risk factors at home and school. The Teachers College Record, 103, 760–822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Fallu, J.-S., & Pagani, L. S. (2009). Student engagement and its relationship with early high school dropout. Journal of Adolescence, 32, 651–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw, C. P., Koth, C. W., Thornton, L. A., & Leaf, P. J. (2009). Altering school climate through school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports: Findings from a group-randomized effectiveness trial. Prevention Science, 10, 100–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, W. G. (1968). The effectiveness of adjustment by subclassification in removing bias in observational studies. Biometrics, 24, 295–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doll, B., & Yoon, J. (2010). The current status of youth prevention science. In B. Doll, W. Pfohl, & J. Yoon (Eds.), Handbook of youth prevention science (pp. 1–18). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, M., Nagin, D., Ribeaud, D., & Malti, T. (2012). Effects of a universal parenting program for highly adherent parents: A propensity score matching approach. Prevention Science, 13, 252–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flay, B. R., Biglan, A., Boruch, R. F., Castro, F. G., Gottfredson, D., Kellam, S., et al. (2005). Standards of evidence: Criteria for efficacy, effectiveness and dissemination. Prevention Science, 6, 151–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, A., & Loken, E. (2013). The garden of forking paths: Why multiple comparisons can be a problem, even when there is no “fishing expedition” or “p-hacking” and the research hypothesis was posited ahead of time. Department of Statistics, Columbia University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glueck, S., & Glueck, E. (1950). Unraveling juvenile delinquency. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottfredson, D. C., Cook, T. D., Gardner, F. E. M., Gorman-Smith, D., Howe, G. W., Sandler, I. N., et al. (2015). Standards of evidence for efficacy, effectiveness, and scale-up research in prevention science: Next generation. Prevention Science, 16, 893–926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo, S., & Fraser, M. W. (2014). Propensity score analysis: Statistical methods and applications (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Head, M. L., Holman, L., Lanfear, R., Kahn, A. T., & Jennions, M. D. (2015). The extent and consequences of p-hacking in science. PLoS Biology, 13, e1002106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2012). Causal inference without balance checking: Coarsened exact matching. Political Analysis, 20, 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imbens, G. W. (2000). The role of the propensity score in estimating dose-response functions. Biometrika, 87, 706–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lechner, M. (2001). Identification and estimation of causal effects of multiple treatments under the conditional independence assumption. In M. Lechner & F. Pfeiffer (Eds.), Econometric evaluations of active labor market policies in Europe (pp. 43–58). Heidelberg: Physica.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Leuven, E., & Sianesi, B. (2015). “PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing.” http://ideas.repec.org/c/boc/bocode/s432001.html.

  • Morgan, S. L., & Winship, C. (2014). Counterfactuals and causal inference: Methods and principles for social research (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1985). Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. The American Statistician, 39, 33–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotherman-Borus, M. J., Song, J., Gwadz, M., Lee, M., Van Rossem, R., & Koopman, C. (2003). Reductions in HIV risk among runaway youth. Prevention Science, 4, 173–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D. B. (1974). Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 688–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D. B. (1977). Assignment to treatment group on the basis of a covariate. Journal of Educational and Behavioral statistics, 2, 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D. B. (2007). The design versus the analysis of observational studies for causal effects: Parallels with the design of randomized trials. Statistics in Medicine, 26, 20–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R. J., Laub, J. H., & Wimer, C. (2006). Does marriage reduce crime? A counterfactual approach to within-individual causal effects. Criminology, 44, 465–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, C. A., Mulvey, E. P., Steinberg, L., Cauffman, E., Losoya, S. H., Hecker, T., et al. (2004). Operational lessons from the pathways to desistance project. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2, 237–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, E. A., Cole, S. R., Bradshaw, C. P., & Leaf, P. J. (2011). The use of propensity scores to assess the generalizability of results from randomized trials. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 174, 369–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweeten, G. (2012). Scaling criminal offending. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 28, 533–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Arizona State University, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 411 Central Ave., Mail Code 4420, Phoenix, AZ, 85004, USA

    Gary Sweeten

Authors
  1. Gary Sweeten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gary Sweeten .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Criminal Justice and Criminology, Georgia State University Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Atlanta, Georgia, USA

    Brent Teasdale

  2. Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas, USA

    Mindy S. Bradley

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sweeten, G. (2017). Propensity Score Matching and Prevention Science. In: Teasdale, B., Bradley, M. (eds) Preventing Crime and Violence. Advances in Prevention Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44124-5_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44124-5_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-44122-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-44124-5

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation