A Two-Step Bayesian Approach for Propensity Score Analysis: Simulations and Case Study
- 801 Downloads
A two-step Bayesian propensity score approach is introduced that incorporates prior information in the propensity score equation and outcome equation without the problems associated with simultaneous Bayesian propensity score approaches. The corresponding variance estimators are also provided. The two-step Bayesian propensity score is provided for three methods of implementation: propensity score stratification, weighting, and optimal full matching. Three simulation studies and one case study are presented to elaborate the proposed two-step Bayesian propensity score approach. Results of the simulation studies reveal that greater precision in the propensity score equation yields better recovery of the frequentist-based treatment effect. A slight advantage is shown for the Bayesian approach in small samples. Results also reveal that greater precision around the wrong treatment effect can lead to seriously distorted results. However, greater precision around the correct treatment effect parameter yields quite good results, with slight improvement seen with greater precision in the propensity score equation. A comparison of coverage rates for the conventional frequentist approach and proposed Bayesian approach is also provided. The case study reveals that credible intervals are wider than frequentist confidence intervals when priors are non-informative.
Key wordspropensity score analysis Bayesian inference
The research reported in this paper was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305D110001 to The University of Wisconsin–Madison. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education.
- Abadie, A., & Imbens, G.W. (2009). Matching on the estimated propensity score (NBER Working Paper 15301). Google Scholar
- Dawid, A.P. (1982). The well-calibrated Bayesian. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 77, 605–610. Google Scholar
- Gelman, A., Carlin, J.B., Stern, H.S., & Rubin, D.B. (2003). Bayesian data analysis (2nd ed.). London: Chapman and Hall. Google Scholar
- Guo, S., & Fraser, M.W. (2010). Propensity score analysis: statistical methods and applications. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Google Scholar
- Heckman, J.J. (2005). The scientific model of causality. In R.M. Stolzenberg (Ed.), Sociological methodology (Vol. 35, pp. 1–97). Boston: Blackwell Publishing. Google Scholar
- Hirano, K., Imbens, G.W., & Ridder, G. (2003). Efficient estimation of average treatment effects using the estimated propensity score. Econometrica, 71, 1169–1189. Google Scholar
- Holland, P.W. (1986). Statistics and causal inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81, 945–960. Google Scholar
- Horvitz, D.G., & Thompson, D.J. (1952). A generalization of sampling without replacement from a finite universe. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 47, 663–685. Google Scholar
- Larsen, M.D. (1999). An analysis of survey data on smoking using propensity scores. Sankya. The Indian Journal of Statistics, 61, 91–105. Google Scholar
- Lechner, M. (2002). Some practical issues in the evaluation of heterogeneous labour market programmes by matching methods. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A. Statistics in Society, 165, 59–82. Google Scholar
- Martin, A.D., Quinn, K.M., & Park, J.H. (2010, May 10). Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) package. http://mcmcpack.wustl.edu/.
- NCES (2001). Early childhood longitudinal study: kindergarten class of 1998–99: base year public-use data files user’s manual (Tech. Rep. No. NCES 2001-029). U.S. Government Printing Office. Google Scholar
- Neyman, J.S. (1923). Statistical problems in agriculture experiments. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B. Statistical Methodology, 2, 107–180. Google Scholar
- R Development Core Team (2011). R: a language and environment for statistical computing (Computer software manual). Vienna, Austria. Available from http://www.R-project.org (ISBN 3-900051-07-0).
- Rässler, S. (2002). Statistical matching: a frequentist theory, practical applications, and alternative Bayesian approaches. New York: Springer. Google Scholar
- Rosenbaum, P.R. (1987). Model-based direct adjustment. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82, 387–394. Google Scholar
- Rosenbaum, P.R. (1989). Optimal matching for observational studies. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 84, 1024–1032. Google Scholar
- Rosenbaum, P.R. (2002). Observational studies (2nd ed.). New York: Springer. Google Scholar
- Rosenbaum, P.R., & Rubin, D.B. (1984). Reducing bias in observational studies using sub-classification on the propensity score. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79, 516–524. Google Scholar
- Rosenbaum, P.R., & Rubin, D.B. (1985). Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate a propensity score. American Statistician, 39, 33–38. Google Scholar
- Rubin, D.B. (1985). The use of propensity scores in applied Bayesian inference. Bayesian Statistics, 2, 463–472. Google Scholar
- Rubin, D.B. (2006). Matched sampling for causal effects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
- Steiner, P.M., & Cook, D. (in press). Matching and propensity scores. In T. Little (Ed.), Oxford handbook of quantitative methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar