ScholarGate
دستیار

مقایسهٔ روش‌ها

روش‌های انتخابی خود را کنار هم مرور کنید؛ ردیف‌های متفاوت برجسته شده‌اند.

ارزیابی سیاست‌گذاری با متغیرهای ابزاری×تطابق امتیاز تمایل (Propensity Score Matching)×
حوزهاستنتاج علّیآمار پژوهش
خانوادهRegression modelProcess / pipeline
سال پیدایش1996 (modern policy-evaluation framing); IV roots 1920s1983
پدیدآورAngrist, Imbens & Rubin (canonical 1996 JASA framework); foundational IV roots in Wright (1928) and Theil (1953)Paul Rosenbaum and Donald Rubin
نوعQuasi-experimental causal inference / IV regressionMethod
منبع بنیادینAngrist, J. D., Imbens, G. W., & Rubin, D. B. (1996). Identification of Causal Effects Using Instrumental Variables. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91(434), 444-455. DOI ↗Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55. DOI ↗
نام‌های دیگرIV policy evaluation, 2SLS policy analysis, natural-experiment IV, policy IV estimationPSM, propensity score weighting, covariate balance
مرتبط53
خلاصهInstrumental Variables (IV) estimation for policy evaluation is a quasi-experimental technique that uses an exogenous instrument — a variable that shifts exposure to a policy but is otherwise unrelated to the outcome — to recover the causal effect of a program or intervention from non-experimental data. Popularised in policy research by Angrist, Imbens, and Rubin (1996), it identifies the Local Average Treatment Effect (LATE) among units whose treatment status is changed by the instrument.Propensity score matching (PSM) is a method for reducing confounding bias in observational studies by balancing baseline characteristics between treatment groups, simulating randomization. Developed by Rosenbaum and Rubin (1983), it estimates the probability of receiving treatment given observed covariates, then matches or weights treated and control individuals with similar treatment probabilities. Widely used in medicine, epidemiology, and policy evaluation when randomized trials are infeasible or unethical, enabling estimation of treatment effects while controlling for selection bias.
ScholarGateمجموعه‌داده
  1. v1
  2. 2 منابع
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 منابع
  3. PUBLISHED

رفتن به جست‌وجو دریافت اسلایدها

ScholarGateمقایسهٔ روش‌ها: Policy Evaluation Instrumental Variables · Propensity Score Matching. بازیابی‌شده در 2026-06-18 از https://scholargate.app/fa/compare