Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Partial Identification of Individual-Level Parameters Using Aggregate Data in a Nonparametric Model

Published 12 Mar 2024 in econ.EM and stat.ME | (2403.07236v6)

Abstract: I develop a methodology to partially identify linear combinations of conditional mean outcomes when the researcher only has access to aggregate data. Unlike the existing literature, I only allow for marginal, not joint, distributions of covariates in my model of aggregate data. Identified sets are very wide in an empirical illustration, suggesting that in order to obtain useful results when only using aggregate data, researchers may have no option other than to impose strong assumptions.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (35)
  1. Burden, B. C. and D. C. Kimball (1998). A new approach to the study of ticket splitting. American Political Science Review 92(3), 533–544.
  2. The econometrics of shape restrictions. Annual Review of Economics 10, 31–63.
  3. Cho, W. K. T. and B. J. Gaines (2004). The limits of ecological inference: The case of split-ticket voting. American Journal of Political Science 48(1), 152–171.
  4. Cross, P. J. and C. F. Manski (2002). Regressions, short and long. Econometrica 70(1), 357–368.
  5. An alternative to ecological correlation. American Sociological Review 18(6), 665–666.
  6. Identifying treatment effects under data combination. Econometrica 82(2), 811–822.
  7. Estimation and inference in an ecological inference model. Journal of Econometric Methods 5(1), 17–48.
  8. Firebaugh, G. (1978). A rule for inferring individual-level relationships from aggregate data. American Sociological Review, 557–572.
  9. Fréchet, M. (1951). Sur les tableaux de corrélation dont les marges sont données. Ann. Univ. Lyon Sc. 4, 53–84.
  10. Freyberger, J. and J. L. Horowitz (2015). Identification and shape restrictions in nonparametric instrumental variables estimation. Journal of Econometrics 189(1), 41–53.
  11. Ho, K. and A. M. Rosen (2015). Partial identification in applied research: Benefits and challenges. Working Paper 21641, National Bureau of Economic Research.
  12. Horowitz, J. L. and C. F. Manski (2000). Nonparametric analysis of randomized experiments with missing covariate and outcome data. Journal of the American Statistical Association 95(449), 77–84.
  13. Aggregate vs. disaggregate data analysis—a paradox in the estimation of a money demand function of Japan under the low interest rate policy. Journal of Applied Econometrics 20(5), 579–601.
  14. Inference on estimators defined by mathematical programming. Journal of Econometrics 226(2), 248–268.
  15. Imbens, G. W. and C. F. Manski (2004). Confidence intervals for partially identified parameters. Econometrica 72(6), 1845–1857.
  16. Pandemic schooling mode and student test scores: evidence from US school districts. American Economic Review: Insights 5(2), 173–190.
  17. Ecological regression with partial identification. Political Analysis 28(1), 65–86.
  18. King, G. (1997). A solution to the ecological inference problem: Reconstructing individual behavior from aggregate data. Princeton University Press.
  19. Binomial-beta hierarchical models for ecological inference. Sociological Methods & Research 28(1), 61–90.
  20. Recent developments in partial identification. Annual Review of Economics 15, 125–150.
  21. Testing for aggregation bias in linear models. The Economic Journal 100(400), 137–150.
  22. Matzkin, R. L. (1994). Restrictions of economic theory in nonparametric methods. Handbook of econometrics 4, 2523–2558.
  23. Molinari, F. (2020). Microeconometrics with partial identification. Handbook of Econometrics 7, 355–486.
  24. Generalization of a result on “Regressions, short and long”. Econometric Theory 22(1), 159–163.
  25. Porter, E. (2015). Education gap between rich and poor is growing wider. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/23/business/economy/education-gap-between-rich-and-poor-is-growing-wider.html.
  26. The econometrics of data combination. Handbook of econometrics 6, 5469–5547.
  27. Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. American Sociological Review 15(3), 351–357.
  28. Bayesian and frequentist inference for ecological inference: The R×\times×C case. Statistica Neerlandica 55(2), 134–156.
  29. Shiveley, W. P. (1974). Utilizing external evidence in cross-level inference. Political Methodology, 61–73.
  30. Stoker, T. M. (1984). Completeness, distribution restrictions, and the form of aggregate functions. Econometrica 52(4), 887–907.
  31. Stoker, T. M. (1986). Consistent estimation of scaled coefficients. Econometrica 54(6), 1461–1481.
  32. Tam Cho, W. K. (1998). Iff the assumption fits…: A comment on the King ecological inference solution. Political Analysis 7, 143–163.
  33. Tamer, E. (2010). Partial identification in econometrics. Annual Review of Economics 2(1), 167–195.
  34. Tavernise, S. (2012). Education gap grows between rich and poor, studies say. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/10/education/education-gap-grows-between-rich-and-poor-studies-show.html.
  35. Theil, H. (1954). Linear aggregation of economic relations.

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Authors (1)

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 6 tweets with 0 likes about this paper.