Monotone Confounding, Monotone Treatment Selection and Monotone Treatment Response
Manski (Monotone treatment response. Econometrica 1997;65:1311–34) and Manski and Pepper (Monotone instrumental variables: with an application to the returns to schooling. Econometrica 2000;68:997–1010) gave sharp bounds on causal effects under the assumptions of monotone treatment response (MTR) and monotone treatment selection (MTS). VanderWeele (The sign of the bias of unmeasured confounding. Biometrics 2008;64:702–6) provided bounds for binary treatment under an assumption of monotone confounding (MC). We discuss the relation between MC and MTS and provide bounds under various combinations of these assumptions. We show that MC and MTS coincide for a binary treatment, but MC does not imply MTS for a treatment variable with more than two levels.
Year of publication: |
2014
|
---|---|
Authors: | Zhichao, Jiang ; Yasutaka, Chiba ; VanderWeele Tyler J. |
Published in: |
Journal of Causal Inference. - De Gruyter. - Vol. 2.2014, 1, p. 12-12
|
Publisher: |
De Gruyter |
Saved in:
Saved in favorites
Similar items by person
-
Alternative Monotonicity Assumptions for Improving Bounds on Natural Direct Effects
Yasutaka, Chiba, (2013)
-
Yasutaka, Chiba, (2012)
-
Instruments and Bounds for Causal Effects under the Monotonic Selection Assumption
Masataka, Taguri, (2012)
- More ...