Empirical Economics

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 333–367 | Cite as

Semiparametric estimation of conditional mean functions with missing data

Combining parametric moments with matching
Original Paper


A new semiparametric estimator for estimating conditional expectation functions from incomplete data is proposed, which integrates parametric regression with nonparametric matching estimators. Besides its applicability to missing data situations due to non-response or attrition, the estimator can also be used for analyzing treatment effect heterogeneity and statistical treatment rules, where data on potential outcomes is missing by definition. By combining moments from a parametric specification with nonparametric estimates of mean outcomes in the non-responding population within a GMM framework, the estimator seeks to balance a good fit in the responding population with low bias in the non-responding population. The estimator is applied to analyzing treatment effect heterogeneity among Swedish rehabilitation programmes.


Mean Square Error Propensity Score Propensity Score Match Vocational Rehabilitation Average Bias 



The author is also affiliated with the Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), Bonn. I am grateful for discussions and comments to Bo Honoré, Francois Laisney, Michael Lechner, Ruth Miquel, Oivind Nilsen, Jeff Smith, the editor and three anonymous referees. This research was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (project NSF 4043-058311) and the Grundlagenforschungsfonds HSG (project G02110112).


  1. Aakvik A (2003) Estimating the employment effects of education for disabled workers in Norway. Empir Econ 28:515–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abbring J, van den Berg G (2004) Analyzing the effect of dynamically assigned treatments using duration models, binary treatment models, and panel data models. Empirical Econ 29:5–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Angrist J (1998) Estimating labour market impact of voluntary military service using social security data. Econometrica 66:249–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Angrist J, Krueger A (1999) Empirical strategies in labor economics. In: Ashenfelter O, Card D (eds) The handbook of labor economics, III. North-Holland, New York, pp 1277–1366Google Scholar
  5. Barnow B, Cain G, Goldberger A (1981) Selection on observables. Evaluation Studies Review Annual 5:43–59Google Scholar
  6. Black D, Smith J, Berger M, Noel B (2003) Is the threat of reemployment services more effective than the services themselves?—evidence from random assignment in the UI system. Am Econ Rev 93:1313–1327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dehejia R (2004) Program evaluation as a decision problem. forthcoming in J EconGoogle Scholar
  8. Dehejia R, Wahba S (1999) Causal effects in non-experimental studies: reevaluating the evaluation of training programmes. J Am Stat Assoc 94:1053–1062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fan J (1992) Design-adaptive nonparametric regression. J Am Stat Assoc 87:998–1004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Frölich M (2004) Finite sample properties of propensity-score matching and weighting estimators. Rev Econ Stat 86:77–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Frölich M (2005) Matching estimators and optimal bandwidth choice. Stat Comput 15(3):197–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frölich M, Heshmati, A, Lechner, M (2004) A microeconometric evaluation of rehabilitation of long-term sickness in Sweden. J Appl Econ 19:375–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gerfin M, Lechner M (2002) Microeconometric evaluation of the active labour market policy in Switzerland. Econ J 112:854–893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hahn J (1998) On the role of the propensity score in efficient semiparametric estimation of average treatment effects. Econometrica 66:315–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hansen LP (1982) Large sample properties of generalized method of moment estimators. Econometrica 50:1029–1054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heckman J, Robb R (1985) Alternative methods for evaluating the impact of interventions. In: Heckman J, Singer B (eds) Longitudinal analysis of labour market data. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Heckman J, Ichimura H, Todd P (1997) Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: evidence from evaluating a job training programme. Rev Econ Stud 64:605–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heckman J, Smith J, Clements N (1997) Making the most out of programme evaluations and social experiments: accounting for heterogeneity in programme impacts. Rev Econ Stud 64:487–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heckman J, Ichimura H, Todd P (1998) Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator. Rev Econ Stud 65:261–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heckman J, Ichimura H, Smith J, Todd P (1998) Characterizing selection bias using experimental data. Econometrica 66:1017–1098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Heckman J, LaLonde R, Smith J (1999) The economics and econometrics of active labour market programs. In: Ashenfelter O, Card D (eds) The handbook of labor economics, III. North-Holland, New York, pp 1865–2097Google Scholar
  22. Jalan J, Ravallion M (2003) Estimating the benefit incidence of an antipoverty program by propensity-score matching. J Bus Econ Stat 21:19–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lechner M (1999) Earnings and employment effects of continuous off-the-job training in east Germany after unification. J Bus Econ Stat 17:74–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Little R, Rubin D (1987) Statistical analysis with missing data. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Manski C (2000) Identification problems and decisions under ambiguity: empirical analysis of treatment response and normative analysis of treatment choice. J Econ 95:415–442Google Scholar
  26. Manski C (2004) Statistical treatment rules for heterogeneous populations. Econometrica 72:1221–1246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rosenbaum P, Rubin D (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70:41–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rubin D (1974) Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. J Educ Psychol 66:688–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Seifert B, Gasser T (1996) Finite-sample variance of local polynomials: analysis and solutions. J Am Stat Assoc 91:267–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Seifert B, Gasser T (2000) Data adaptive ridging in local polynomial regression. J Comput Graph Stat 9:338–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wald A (1950) Statistical decision functions. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversity College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.University of St.Gallen, SIAWSt.GallenSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations