Statistics > Methodology
[Submitted on 2 Nov 2015 (v1), revised 30 Nov 2015 (this version, v2), latest version 20 Feb 2016 (v3)]
Title:Posterior Predictive P-values with Fisher Randomization Tests in Noncompliance Settings: Test Statistics vs Discrepancy Variables
View PDFAbstract:In the presence of noncompliance, one might want inferential tests that focus on the compliers themselves rather than the overall sample. Rubin (1998) put forth such a method, and argued that averaging permutation based p-values over the posterior of a nuisance parameter could increase power when testing for complier average causal effect, as compared to general intent-to-treat tests. The general scheme is to repeatedly do a two-step process of imputing missing compliance statuses and conducting a permutation test with the completed data. In this paper we explore this idea further, comparing the use of discrepancy measures, which depend on unknown but imputed parameters, to classical test statistics and exploring different approaches for imputing the unknown compliance statuses. We also examine consequences of model misspecification in the imputation step, and discuss to what extent this additional modeling undercuts the permutation test?s model independence. We find that, especially for discrepancy measures, modeling choices can impact both power and validity. In particular, imputing missing compliance statuses under the assumption of the null can radically reduce power, but not doing so can jeopardize validity. Fortunately, covariates predictive of compliance status can mitigate the negative aspects of these choices. Finally, we compare this overall approach to Bayesian model-based tests, that is tests that are directly derived from posterior credible intervals, with both correct and incorrect model specification. We find that adding the permutation step in an otherwise Bayesian approach improves robustness to model specification without substantial loss of power.
Submission history
From: Laura Forastiere [view email][v1] Mon, 2 Nov 2015 14:35:17 UTC (57 KB)
[v2] Mon, 30 Nov 2015 14:30:45 UTC (58 KB)
[v3] Sat, 20 Feb 2016 15:54:08 UTC (104 KB)
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.