Evaluating the Use of Ridge Regression and Principal Components in Propensity Score Estimators under Multicollinearity
Multicollinearity can be present in the propensity score model when estimating average treatment effects (ATEs). In this thesis, logistic ridge regression (LRR) and principal components logistic regression (PCLR) are evaluated as an alternative to ML estimation of the propensity score model. ATE est...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Others |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Uppsala universitet, Statistiska institutionen
2014
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-226924 |
id |
ndltd-UPSALLA1-oai-DiVA.org-uu-226924 |
---|---|
record_format |
oai_dc |
spelling |
ndltd-UPSALLA1-oai-DiVA.org-uu-2269242014-06-25T04:59:55ZEvaluating the Use of Ridge Regression and Principal Components in Propensity Score Estimators under MulticollinearityengGripencrantz, SarahUppsala universitet, Statistiska institutionen2014Causal InferencePropensity ScoreIPW estimatorStratificationMatchingLogistic Ridge RegressionPrincipal Components Logistic RegressionMulticollinearity can be present in the propensity score model when estimating average treatment effects (ATEs). In this thesis, logistic ridge regression (LRR) and principal components logistic regression (PCLR) are evaluated as an alternative to ML estimation of the propensity score model. ATE estimators based on weighting (IPW), matching and stratification are assessed in a Monte Carlo simulation study to evaluate LRR and PCLR. Further, an empirical example of using LRR and PCLR on real data under multicollinearity is provided. Results from the simulation study reveal that under multicollinearity and in small samples, the use of LRR reduces bias in the matching estimator, compared to ML. In large samples PCLR yields lowest bias, and typically was found to have the lowest MSE in all estimators. PCLR matched ML in bias under IPW estimation and in some cases had lower bias. The stratification estimator was heavily biased compared to matching and IPW but both bias and MSE improved as PCLR was applied, and for some cases under LRR. The specification with PCLR in the empirical example was usually most sensitive as a strongly correlated covariate was included in the propensity score model. Student thesisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesistexthttp://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-226924application/pdfinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
collection |
NDLTD |
language |
English |
format |
Others
|
sources |
NDLTD |
topic |
Causal Inference Propensity Score IPW estimator Stratification Matching Logistic Ridge Regression Principal Components Logistic Regression |
spellingShingle |
Causal Inference Propensity Score IPW estimator Stratification Matching Logistic Ridge Regression Principal Components Logistic Regression Gripencrantz, Sarah Evaluating the Use of Ridge Regression and Principal Components in Propensity Score Estimators under Multicollinearity |
description |
Multicollinearity can be present in the propensity score model when estimating average treatment effects (ATEs). In this thesis, logistic ridge regression (LRR) and principal components logistic regression (PCLR) are evaluated as an alternative to ML estimation of the propensity score model. ATE estimators based on weighting (IPW), matching and stratification are assessed in a Monte Carlo simulation study to evaluate LRR and PCLR. Further, an empirical example of using LRR and PCLR on real data under multicollinearity is provided. Results from the simulation study reveal that under multicollinearity and in small samples, the use of LRR reduces bias in the matching estimator, compared to ML. In large samples PCLR yields lowest bias, and typically was found to have the lowest MSE in all estimators. PCLR matched ML in bias under IPW estimation and in some cases had lower bias. The stratification estimator was heavily biased compared to matching and IPW but both bias and MSE improved as PCLR was applied, and for some cases under LRR. The specification with PCLR in the empirical example was usually most sensitive as a strongly correlated covariate was included in the propensity score model. |
author |
Gripencrantz, Sarah |
author_facet |
Gripencrantz, Sarah |
author_sort |
Gripencrantz, Sarah |
title |
Evaluating the Use of Ridge Regression and Principal Components in Propensity Score Estimators under Multicollinearity |
title_short |
Evaluating the Use of Ridge Regression and Principal Components in Propensity Score Estimators under Multicollinearity |
title_full |
Evaluating the Use of Ridge Regression and Principal Components in Propensity Score Estimators under Multicollinearity |
title_fullStr |
Evaluating the Use of Ridge Regression and Principal Components in Propensity Score Estimators under Multicollinearity |
title_full_unstemmed |
Evaluating the Use of Ridge Regression and Principal Components in Propensity Score Estimators under Multicollinearity |
title_sort |
evaluating the use of ridge regression and principal components in propensity score estimators under multicollinearity |
publisher |
Uppsala universitet, Statistiska institutionen |
publishDate |
2014 |
url |
http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-226924 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT gripencrantzsarah evaluatingtheuseofridgeregressionandprincipalcomponentsinpropensityscoreestimatorsundermulticollinearity |
_version_ |
1716704884246446080 |