방법 비교
선택한 방법을 나란히 검토하세요. 서로 다른 행은 강조 표시됩니다.
| 교육 연구에서의 역확률 가중치× | Coarsened Exact Matching (CEM)× | |
|---|---|---|
| 분야 | 인과추론 | 인과추론 |
| 계열 | Regression model | Regression model |
| 기원 연도≠ | 1983–2003 | 2011-2012 |
| 창시자≠ | Rosenbaum & Rubin (propensity score, 1983); Hirano, Imbens & Ridder (efficient IPW, 2003) | Iacus, King, & Porro |
| 유형≠ | Causal weighting estimator | Matching / causal inference |
| 원전≠ | Hirano, K., Imbens, G. W., & Ridder, G. (2003). Efficient Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Using the Estimated Propensity Score. Econometrica, 71(4), 1161-1189. DOI ↗ | Iacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2012). Causal Inference without Balance Checking: Coarsened Exact Matching. Political Analysis, 20(1), 1-24. DOI ↗ |
| 별칭≠ | IPW in education, propensity-weighted analysis, IPTW education, inverse probability treatment weighting | CEM, coarsened matching, monotonic imbalance bounding matching |
| 관련 | 6 | 6 |
| 요약≠ | Inverse Probability Weighting (IPW) is a causal inference technique that reweights observational education data to mimic a randomised experiment. Each student or school is assigned a weight equal to the inverse of the probability they received the treatment — thereby creating a pseudo-population in which programme participation is independent of measured background characteristics. The method is widely used in education research to evaluate school programmes, interventions, and policies from administrative or survey data. | Coarsened Exact Matching is a preprocessing method that achieves covariate balance by temporarily coarsening continuous variables into bins, exactly matching treated and control units within those bins, and then discarding all unmatched units. Introduced by Iacus, King, and Porro (2011, 2012), it bounds imbalance on each covariate independently, yielding a matched sample on which any estimator can be applied without relying on a propensity score model. |
| ScholarGate데이터셋 ↗ |
|
|