当研究者和社会偏好不一致时的最优估计

IF 7.1 1区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Econometrica Pub Date : 2025-09-16 DOI:10.3982/ECTA18640
Jann Spiess
{"title":"当研究者和社会偏好不一致时的最优估计","authors":"Jann Spiess","doi":"10.3982/ECTA18640","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Econometric analysis typically focuses on the statistical properties of fixed estimators and ignores researcher choices. In this article, I instead approach the analysis of experimental data as a mechanism-design problem that acknowledges that researchers choose between estimators, sometimes based on the data and often according to their own preferences. Specifically, I focus on covariate adjustments, which can increase the precision of a treatment-effect estimate, but open the door to bias when researchers engage in specification searches. First, I establish that unbiasedness as a requirement on the estimation of the average treatment effect can align researchers' preferences with the minimization of the mean-squared error relative to the truth, and that fixing the bias can yield an optimal restriction in a minimax sense. Second, I provide a constructive characterization of treatment-effect estimators with fixed bias as sample-splitting procedures. Third, I discuss the implementation of second-best estimators that leave room for beneficial specification searches.</p>","PeriodicalId":50556,"journal":{"name":"Econometrica","volume":"93 5","pages":"1779-1810"},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optimal Estimation When Researcher and Social Preferences Are Misaligned\",\"authors\":\"Jann Spiess\",\"doi\":\"10.3982/ECTA18640\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Econometric analysis typically focuses on the statistical properties of fixed estimators and ignores researcher choices. In this article, I instead approach the analysis of experimental data as a mechanism-design problem that acknowledges that researchers choose between estimators, sometimes based on the data and often according to their own preferences. Specifically, I focus on covariate adjustments, which can increase the precision of a treatment-effect estimate, but open the door to bias when researchers engage in specification searches. First, I establish that unbiasedness as a requirement on the estimation of the average treatment effect can align researchers' preferences with the minimization of the mean-squared error relative to the truth, and that fixing the bias can yield an optimal restriction in a minimax sense. Second, I provide a constructive characterization of treatment-effect estimators with fixed bias as sample-splitting procedures. Third, I discuss the implementation of second-best estimators that leave room for beneficial specification searches.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50556,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Econometrica\",\"volume\":\"93 5\",\"pages\":\"1779-1810\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Econometrica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.3982/ECTA18640\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Econometrica","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.3982/ECTA18640","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

计量经济学分析通常侧重于固定估计量的统计性质,而忽略了研究者的选择。在本文中,我将实验数据的分析作为一个机制设计问题来处理,承认研究人员在估计器之间进行选择,有时是基于数据,但通常是根据他们自己的偏好。具体来说,我专注于协变量调整,它可以提高治疗效果估计的精度,但当研究人员从事规范搜索时,会产生偏差。首先,我确定,作为对平均治疗效果估计的要求,无偏性可以使研究人员的偏好与相对于事实的均方误差最小化相一致,并且固定偏倚可以在极小极大意义上产生最佳限制。其次,我提供了一个具有固定偏差的治疗效果估计器作为样本分裂程序的建设性表征。第三,我讨论了次优估计器的实现,它为有益的规范搜索留下了空间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Optimal Estimation When Researcher and Social Preferences Are Misaligned

Econometric analysis typically focuses on the statistical properties of fixed estimators and ignores researcher choices. In this article, I instead approach the analysis of experimental data as a mechanism-design problem that acknowledges that researchers choose between estimators, sometimes based on the data and often according to their own preferences. Specifically, I focus on covariate adjustments, which can increase the precision of a treatment-effect estimate, but open the door to bias when researchers engage in specification searches. First, I establish that unbiasedness as a requirement on the estimation of the average treatment effect can align researchers' preferences with the minimization of the mean-squared error relative to the truth, and that fixing the bias can yield an optimal restriction in a minimax sense. Second, I provide a constructive characterization of treatment-effect estimators with fixed bias as sample-splitting procedures. Third, I discuss the implementation of second-best estimators that leave room for beneficial specification searches.

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
Econometrica
Econometrica 社会科学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
3.30%
发文量
75
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Econometrica publishes original articles in all branches of economics - theoretical and empirical, abstract and applied, providing wide-ranging coverage across the subject area. It promotes studies that aim at the unification of the theoretical-quantitative and the empirical-quantitative approach to economic problems and that are penetrated by constructive and rigorous thinking. It explores a unique range of topics each year - from the frontier of theoretical developments in many new and important areas, to research on current and applied economic problems, to methodologically innovative, theoretical and applied studies in econometrics. Econometrica maintains a long tradition that submitted articles are refereed carefully and that detailed and thoughtful referee reports are provided to the author as an aid to scientific research, thus ensuring the high calibre of papers found in Econometrica. An international board of editors, together with the referees it has selected, has succeeded in substantially reducing editorial turnaround time, thereby encouraging submissions of the highest quality. We strongly encourage recent Ph. D. graduates to submit their work to Econometrica. Our policy is to take into account the fact that recent graduates are less experienced in the process of writing and submitting papers.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信