Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Incorporating Preferences Into Treatment Assignment Problems

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

arxiv 2311.08963 v1 pith:74JHWFXW submitted 2023-11-15 econ.EM

classification econ.EM
keywords preferencestreatmentindividualsinformationoptimalstrstrueassignment
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

This study investigates the problem of individualizing treatment allocations using stated preferences for treatments. If individuals know in advance how the assignment will be individualized based on their stated preferences, they may state false preferences. We derive an individualized treatment rule (ITR) that maximizes welfare when individuals strategically state their preferences. We also show that the optimal ITR is strategy-proof, that is, individuals do not have a strong incentive to lie even if they know the optimal ITR a priori. Constructing the optimal ITR requires information on the distribution of true preferences and the average treatment effect conditioned on true preferences. In practice, the information must be identified and estimated from the data. As true preferences are hidden information, the identification is not straightforward. We discuss two experimental designs that allow the identification: strictly strategy-proof randomized controlled trials and doubly randomized preference trials. Under the presumption that data comes from one of these experiments, we develop data-dependent procedures for determining ITR, that is, statistical treatment rules (STRs). The maximum regret of the proposed STRs converges to zero at a rate of the square root of the sample size. An empirical application demonstrates our proposed STRs.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Dependent Randomized Rounding for Budget Constrained Experimental Design

    stat.ML 2025-06 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    Swap rounding for budget-constrained designs is shown to be flawed as written: the pseudocode breaks marginal preservation and the variance decomposition omits indirect covariances.

Pith tools