Salīdzināt metodes
Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.
| Robustiska pretfaktora ietekmes novērtējums× | Kauzalitātes jutīguma analīze× | |
|---|---|---|
| Nozare | Cēloņsakarību secināšana | Cēloņsakarību secināšana |
| Saime | Regression model | Regression model |
| Izcelsmes gads≠ | 2010s | 1983–2002 |
| Autors≠ | European Commission evaluation community; Pellegrini, Ferrara and colleagues | Paul R. Rosenbaum (hidden-bias framework); extended by Cinelli & Hazlett (omitted-variable approach) |
| Tips≠ | Robustness-validated causal evaluation | Diagnostic / robustness check |
| Pirmavots≠ | Bia, M., Flores, C. A., Flores-Lagunes, A., & Mattei, A. (2014). A Stata package for the application of semiparametric estimators of dose–response functions. Stata Journal, 14(3), 580–604. link ↗ | Rosenbaum, P. R. (2002). Observational Studies (2nd ed.). Springer. ISBN: 978-0387989679 |
| Citi nosaukumi | Robust CIE, Sensitivity-checked CIE, Multi-method counterfactual evaluation, Robustness-validated impact evaluation | sensitivity analysis, hidden-bias sensitivity analysis, Rosenbaum sensitivity analysis, omitted-variable sensitivity |
| Saistītās≠ | 5 | 4 |
| Kopsavilkums≠ | Robust Counterfactual Impact Evaluation (Robust CIE) strengthens causal impact estimates by combining multiple quasi-experimental estimators, placebo tests, and formal sensitivity analyses. Rather than relying on a single method, it cross-validates findings across approaches — such as matching, difference-in-differences, and regression discontinuity — to ensure that conclusions do not depend on any single methodological choice. | Sensitivity analysis for causality assesses how robust a causal conclusion is to unobserved confounding. Rather than assuming all confounders are controlled, it asks: how strong would an unmeasured variable need to be to overturn the estimated effect? It is an indispensable robustness check after any quasi-experimental or observational causal analysis. |
| ScholarGateDatu kopa ↗ |
|
|