Abstract
We show that propensity score matching (PSM), an enormously popular method of preprocessing data for causal inference, often accomplishes the opposite of its intended goal—thus increasing imbalance, inefficiency, model dependence, and bias. The weakness of PSM comes from its attempts to approximate a completely randomized experiment, rather than, as with other matching methods, a more efficient fully blocked randomized experiment. PSM is thus uniquely blind to the often large portion of imbalance that can be eliminated by approximating full blocking with other matching methods. Moreover, in data balanced enough to approximate complete randomization, either to begin with or after pruning some observations, PSM approximates random matching which, we show, increases imbalance even relative to the original data. Although these results suggest researchers replace PSM with one of the other available matching methods, propensity scores have other productive uses.
Keywords
Affiliated Institutions
Related Publications
Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies.
A discussion of matching, randomization, random sampling, and other methods of controlling extraneous variation is presented. The objective is to specify the benefits of randomi...
Multiple Imputation for Missing Data
Two algorithms for producing multiple imputations for missing data are evaluated with simulated data. Software using a propensity score classifier with the approximate Bayesian ...
Randomization tests for ERP topographies and whole spatiotemporal data matrices
Abstract In ERP studies, the comparison of topographies (multichannel measurements) or whole spatiotemporal data matrices (multichannel time series of measurements), the classic...
Re: “Multivariable Mendelian Randomization: The Use of Pleiotropic Genetic Variants to Estimate Causal Effects”
A conventional Mendelian randomization analysis assesses the causal effect of a risk factor on an outcome by using genetic variants that are solely associated with the risk fact...
Random Allocation in Observational Data
Conventional observational epidemiology has an unenviable reputation for generating false-positive findings,1,2 or "scares," as others call them.3 In 1993, for example, the New ...
Publication Info
- Year
- 2019
- Type
- article
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 435-454
- Citations
- 1505
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
Cite This
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1017/pan.2019.11