↓ Skip to main content

Estimating Heterogeneous Treatment Effects with Observational Data

Overview of attention for article published in Sociological Methodology, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#1 of 296)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Readers on

mendeley
304 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Estimating Heterogeneous Treatment Effects with Observational Data
Published in
Sociological Methodology, November 2012
DOI 10.1177/0081175012452652
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Individuals differ not only in their background characteristics, but also in how they respond to a particular treatment, intervention, or stimulation. In particular, treatment effects may vary systematically by the propensity for treatment. In this paper, we discuss a practical approach to studying heterogeneous treatment effects as a function of the treatment propensity, under the same assumption commonly underlying regression analysis: ignorability. We describe one parametric method and two non-parametric methods for estimating interactions between treatment and the propensity for treatment. For the first method, we begin by estimating propensity scores for the probability of treatment given a set of observed covariates for each unit and construct balanced propensity score strata; we then estimate propensity score stratum-specific average treatment effects and evaluate a trend across them. For the second method, we match control units to treated units based on the propensity score and transform the data into treatment-control comparisons at the most elementary level at which such comparisons can be constructed; we then estimate treatment effects as a function of the propensity score by fitting a non-parametric model as a smoothing device. For the third method, we first estimate non-parametric regressions of the outcome variable as a function of the propensity score separately for treated units and for control units and then take the difference between the two non-parametric regressions. We illustrate the application of these methods with an empirical example of the effects of college attendance on womens fertility.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 304 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 9 3%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 291 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 87 29%
Student > Master 38 13%
Researcher 36 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 23 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 14 5%
Other 44 14%
Unknown 62 20%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 111 37%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 46 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 6%
Mathematics 10 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 3%
Other 37 12%
Unknown 75 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 82. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 August 2026.
All research outputs
#654,313
of 34,329,910 outputs
Outputs from Sociological Methodology
#1
of 296 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,876
of 344,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sociological Methodology
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,329,910 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 296 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,555 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.