방법 비교
선택한 방법을 나란히 검토하세요. 서로 다른 행은 강조 표시됩니다.
| 정책 평가 플라세보 검증× | 인과 추론을 위한 도구 변수(IV) 방법× | |
|---|---|---|
| 분야≠ | 인과추론 | 보건경제학 |
| 계열≠ | Regression model | Process / pipeline |
| 기원 연도≠ | 1990s–2000s | 1990s (modern applications) |
| 창시자≠ | Bertrand, Duflo & Mullainathan (2004 canonical formalization); Imbens & Wooldridge (2009 textbook treatment) | Angrist & Pischke (applied econometrics); rooted in econometric theory |
| 유형≠ | Falsification / specification check | Method |
| 원전≠ | 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 ↗ |
| 별칭 | placebo test, falsification test, fake treatment test, placebo regression | IV, two-stage least squares, TSLS, causal estimation |
| 관련≠ | 4 | 3 |
| 요약≠ | 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. |
| ScholarGate데이터셋 ↗ |
|
|