手法を比較
選択した手法を並べて確認できます。異なる行はハイライト表示されます。
| ポリシー評価のためのプラセボテスト× | 因果推論のための操作変数(IV)法× | |
|---|---|---|
| 分野≠ | 因果推論 | 医療経済学 |
| 系統≠ | Regression model | Process / pipeline |
| 提唱年≠ | 1990s–2000s | 1990s (modern applications) |
| 提唱者≠ | Bertrand, Duflo & Mullainathan (2004 canonical formalization); Imbens & Wooldridge (2009 textbook treatment) | Angrist & Pischke (applied econometrics); rooted in econometric theory |
| 種類≠ | Falsification / specification check | Method |
| 原典≠ | Imbens, G. W., & Wooldridge, J. M. (2009). Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(1), 5-86. DOI ↗ | Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J. S. (2009). Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion. Princeton: Princeton University Press. link ↗ |
| 別名 | placebo test, falsification test, fake treatment test, placebo regression | IV, two-stage least squares, TSLS, causal estimation |
| 関連≠ | 4 | 3 |
| 概要≠ | A policy evaluation placebo test is a falsification check used in quasi-experimental research to validate a causal identification strategy. The researcher applies the same estimation method to a pseudo-treatment — a time period, group, or outcome where the real policy could not have had an effect — and checks that no spurious effect is detected. A null placebo result builds confidence that the main estimate reflects a genuine causal impact rather than bias or confounding. | Instrumental variables (IV) is an econometric method to estimate causal effects when treatment or exposure is not randomly assigned and confounding is severe or unmeasured. IV relies on a third variable (instrument) that influences treatment but does not directly affect the outcome, allowing researchers to isolate the causal effect from the noise of confounding. Developed extensively in econometrics (Angrist & Pischke, 1990s–2000s), IV methods are increasingly used in health economics and health services research to leverage natural experiments and policy changes. |
| ScholarGateデータセット ↗ |
|
|