title: Combating unmeasured confounding in cross-sectional studies: evaluating instrumental-variable and Heckman selection models.
abstract: Unmeasured confounding is the principal threat to unbiased estimation of treatment "effects" (i.e., regression parameters for binary regressors) in nonexperimental research. It refers to unmeasured characteristics of individuals that lead them both to be in a particular "treatment" category and to register higher or lower values than others on a response variable. In this article, I introduce readers to 2 econometric techniques designed to control the problem, with a particular emphasis on the Heckman selection model (HSM). Both techniques can be used with only cross-sectional data. Using a Monte Carlo experiment, I compare the performance of instrumental-variable regression (IVR) and HSM to that of ordinary least squares (OLS) under conditions with treatment and unmeasured confounding both present and absent. I find HSM generally to outperform IVR with respect to mean-square-error of treatment estimates, as well as power for detecting either a treatment effect or unobserved confounding. However, both HSM and IVR require a large sample to be fully effective. The use of HSM and IVR in tandem with OLS to untangle unobserved confounding bias in cross-sectional data is further demonstrated with an empirical application. Using data from the 2006-2010 General Social Survey (National Opinion Research Center, 2014), I examine the association between being married and subjective well-being.
authors.affiliation: Bowling Green State University.
authors.forename: Alfred
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: DeMaris
mesh_terms: D015986:Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D006801:Humans; D016018:Least-Squares Analysis; D009010:Monte Carlo Method; D013223:Statistics as Topic
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 2007 Jun;48(2):149-63
references.pmid: 17583271
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 2000 Sep;41(3):241-55
references.pmid: 11011503
references.citation: AJS. 2002 Jan;107(4):1065-96
references.pmid: 12227382
references.citation: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2005 Jan;60(1):S21-9
references.pmid: 15643043
references.citation: J Health Soc Behav. 1983 Jun;24(2):122-31
references.pmid: 6886367
references.citation: Psychol Methods. 2010 Mar;15(1):38-46
references.pmid: 20230101
references.citation: Stat Med. 2006 Feb 15;25(3):389-413
references.pmid: 16382420
references.citation: Epidemiology. 2006 Jul;17(4):360-72
references.pmid: 16755261
references.citation: Psychol Methods. 2008 Dec;13(4):279-313
references.pmid: 19071996