Local Randomization Regression Discontinuity Designs when Test Scores are the Running Variable
以测试分数为运行变量的局部随机化断点回归设计AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要研究断点回归局部随机化设计的因果效应估计偏差。
以测试分数为运行变量的局部随机化断点回归设计AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Explanations of the internal validity of regression discontinuity designs (RDD) generally appeal to the idea that RDDs are ``as good as" random near the treatment cut point. Cattaneo, Frandsen, and Titiunik (2015) are the first to take this justification to its full conclusion and propose estimating the RDD local average treatment effect (LATE) the same as one would a randomized experiment. This paper explores the implications of analyzing an RDD as a local random experiment when the running variable is a test score. I derive a formula for the bias in the LATE estimate estimated using the local randomization method, $aρΔ$. Where $a$ is the relationship between latent proficiency and the potential outcome absent treatment, $ρ$ is the test reliability, and $Δ$ is the distance between the treatment and control running variable value. I use this quantification of the bias to demonstrate that local randomization and related design based methods for estimating RDDs are problematic when the running variable is test score or other human developed measure (e.g., medical tests).