ScholarGate
Asistents

Salīdzināt metodes

Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.

Jutīguma analīze cēloņsakarību izpētē izglītībā×Metodes (CEM / Optimālā / Ģenētiskā)×
NozareCēloņsakarību secināšanaCēloņsakarību secināšana
SaimeRegression modelRegression model
Izcelsmes gads1983–20022012
AutorsPaul R. Rosenbaum (formal framework); applied in education research by Briggs and othersIacus, King & Porro (CEM); Hansen (optimal/full matching)
TipsCausal robustness / bias assessmentMatching for causal inference
PirmavotsRosenbaum, P. R. (2002). Observational Studies (2nd ed.). Springer. ISBN: 978-0387989679Iacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2012). Causal Inference without Balance Checking: Coarsened Exact Matching. Political Analysis, 20(1), 1-24. DOI ↗
Citi nosaukumiRosenbaum sensitivity analysis, hidden-bias sensitivity analysis, causal sensitivity analysis, SA for causal education studiescoarsened exact matching, optimal matching, genetic matching, CEM
Saistītās65
KopsavilkumsSensitivity analysis for causality in education research tests how robust a quasi-experimental finding is to unmeasured confounding. Rather than assuming all bias has been removed, it quantifies how large a hidden bias would need to be to overturn a causal conclusion — a critical safeguard when randomisation is impossible, which is common in educational settings.Matching Methods are a family of causal-inference techniques beyond propensity-score matching that pair treated and control units with similar covariates so that a treatment effect can be read off the balanced sample. The family includes Coarsened Exact Matching (Iacus, King & Porro, 2012), optimal matching, and genetic matching.
ScholarGateDatu kopa
  1. v1
  2. 2 Avoti
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Avoti
  3. PUBLISHED

Doties uz meklēšanu Lejupielādēt slaidus

ScholarGateSalīdzināt metodes: Sensitivity analysis for causality in education research · Matching Methods. Izgūts 2026-06-18 no https://scholargate.app/lv/compare