Using Propensity Score Matching to Improve Validity in Public Administration Research

Michael Howell-Moroney
{"title":"Using Propensity Score Matching to Improve Validity in Public Administration Research","authors":"Michael Howell-Moroney","doi":"10.4018/978-1-7998-8243-5.ch003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Randomized clinical trials have a longstanding status as the gold standard in detecting causal effects. In the social sciences, randomized clinical trials are rare because of their attendant logistical and cost burdens. Most social science research makes use of observational data. The empirical challenge posed by observational data is that treatment assignment is no longer random. This challenge continues to spur innovation across many disciplines toward more sophisticated techniques for estimating causal relationships. Scholars have developed a common theoretical framework for estimating causal effects, often called the potential outcomes or counterfactual framework. This chapter demonstrates the propensity score matching methodology as a way to estimate causal effects using observational data. Throughout, an example from public administration research, the effect of government employment on volunteerism, is used to illustrate the concepts. Empirical estimates of the treatment effects show that there may be a causal effect of government employment on volunteerism.","PeriodicalId":318923,"journal":{"name":"Public Affairs Education and Training in the 21st Century","volume":"76 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Affairs Education and Training in the 21st Century","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-8243-5.ch003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Randomized clinical trials have a longstanding status as the gold standard in detecting causal effects. In the social sciences, randomized clinical trials are rare because of their attendant logistical and cost burdens. Most social science research makes use of observational data. The empirical challenge posed by observational data is that treatment assignment is no longer random. This challenge continues to spur innovation across many disciplines toward more sophisticated techniques for estimating causal relationships. Scholars have developed a common theoretical framework for estimating causal effects, often called the potential outcomes or counterfactual framework. This chapter demonstrates the propensity score matching methodology as a way to estimate causal effects using observational data. Throughout, an example from public administration research, the effect of government employment on volunteerism, is used to illustrate the concepts. Empirical estimates of the treatment effects show that there may be a causal effect of government employment on volunteerism.
运用倾向得分匹配提高公共管理研究的效度
长期以来,随机临床试验一直是检测因果关系的金标准。在社会科学领域,随机临床试验很少见,因为它们伴随着后勤和成本负担。大多数社会科学研究都使用观测数据。观察数据提出的经验挑战是,治疗分配不再是随机的。这一挑战继续刺激着许多学科的创新,朝着估算因果关系的更复杂的技术发展。学者们已经开发了一个通用的理论框架来估计因果关系,通常被称为潜在结果或反事实框架。本章演示了倾向得分匹配方法作为使用观测数据估计因果效应的一种方法。在整个过程中,一个公共行政研究的例子,政府就业对志愿服务的影响,被用来说明这些概念。对治疗效果的实证估计表明,政府就业对志愿服务可能存在因果效应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信