变量调整背后的认识论

Grayson L. Baird, Stephen L. Bieber
{"title":"变量调整背后的认识论","authors":"Grayson L. Baird, Stephen L. Bieber","doi":"arxiv-2405.17224","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is often asserted that to control for the effects of confounders, one\nshould include the confounding variables of concern in a statistical model as a\ncovariate. Conversely, it is also asserted that control can only be concluded\nby design, where the results from an analysis can only be interpreted as\nevidence of an effect because the design controlled for the cause. To suggest\notherwise is said to be a fallacy of cum hoc ergo propter hoc. Obviously, these\ntwo assertions create a conundrum: How can the effect of confounder be\ncontrolled for with analysis instead of by design without committing cum hoc\nergo propter hoc? The present manuscript answers this conundrum.","PeriodicalId":501323,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - STAT - Other Statistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Epistemology behind Covariate Adjustment\",\"authors\":\"Grayson L. Baird, Stephen L. Bieber\",\"doi\":\"arxiv-2405.17224\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is often asserted that to control for the effects of confounders, one\\nshould include the confounding variables of concern in a statistical model as a\\ncovariate. Conversely, it is also asserted that control can only be concluded\\nby design, where the results from an analysis can only be interpreted as\\nevidence of an effect because the design controlled for the cause. To suggest\\notherwise is said to be a fallacy of cum hoc ergo propter hoc. Obviously, these\\ntwo assertions create a conundrum: How can the effect of confounder be\\ncontrolled for with analysis instead of by design without committing cum hoc\\nergo propter hoc? The present manuscript answers this conundrum.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501323,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"arXiv - STAT - Other Statistics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"arXiv - STAT - Other Statistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/arxiv-2405.17224\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - STAT - Other Statistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2405.17224","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们通常认为,要控制混杂因素的影响,就应在统计模型中将相关的混杂变量作为一个变量。反之,也有人断言,只有通过设计才能得出控制的结论,即由于设计控制了原因,分析结果只能被解释为效果的证据。反之,则是 "既成事实"(cum hoc ergo propter hoc)的谬误。很明显,这两个论断造成了一个难题:如何通过分析而不是设计来控制混杂因素的影响,而又不犯兼有因果关系的谬误?本手稿回答了这一难题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Epistemology behind Covariate Adjustment
It is often asserted that to control for the effects of confounders, one should include the confounding variables of concern in a statistical model as a covariate. Conversely, it is also asserted that control can only be concluded by design, where the results from an analysis can only be interpreted as evidence of an effect because the design controlled for the cause. To suggest otherwise is said to be a fallacy of cum hoc ergo propter hoc. Obviously, these two assertions create a conundrum: How can the effect of confounder be controlled for with analysis instead of by design without committing cum hoc ergo propter hoc? The present manuscript answers this conundrum.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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