REVIEW 2 cited by
Insights on Variance Estimation for Blocked and Matched Pairs Designs
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Evaluating blocked randomized experiments from a potential outcomes perspective has two primary branches of work. The first focuses on larger blocks, with multiple treatment and control units in each block. The second focuses on matched pairs, with a single treatment and control unit in each block. These literatures not only provide different estimators for the standard errors of the estimated average impact, but they are also built on different sets of assumptions. Neither literature handles cases with blocks of varying size that contain singleton treatment or control units, a case which can occur in a variety of contexts, such as with different forms of matching or post-stratification. In this paper, we reconcile the literatures by carefully examining the performance of variance estimators under several different frameworks. We then use these insights to derive novel variance estimators for experiments containing blocks of different sizes.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Testing weak nulls in matched observational studies
For general matched observational studies, sensitivity analysis for the weak null cannot be simultaneously sharp for the sharp null; two procedures, one valid for heterogeneous effects but conservative and one sharp u...
-
Regression-adjusted average treatment effect estimates in stratified randomized experiments
Regression-adjusted average treatment effect estimators are consistent, asymptotically normal, and asymptotically no less efficient than the unadjusted stratified difference-in-means estimator.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.