Abstract
A quasi-experiment is a study, where the researcher manipulates the IV , but participants are not randomly assigned to conditions. Therefore, it is prone to selection bias . The propensity score method reduces the systematic error of selection bias if some conditions are fulfilled. A participant’s propensity score is his or her probability of belonging to the E-condition. The propensity score method consists of two phases. First, the propensity scores are estimated from sample data. A set of auxiliary variables of the participants is measured. These variables are used to estimate participants’ propensity scores. For example, if the IV has two (E- and C- ) conditions, the auxiliary variables and logistic regression are applied to estimate a participant’s probability of belonging to the E-condition. Second, effects of the IV on the DV are estimated using the propensity scores to reduce selection bias . For example, groups of participants are matched on their propensity scores, and condition effects are estimated per matched group. The propensity score method corrects for selection bias of the auxiliary variables, but not for bias of variables that are not measured.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Agresti, A. (2002). Categorical data analysis (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Agresti, A., & Finlay, B. (2009). Statistical methods for the social sciences (4th ed.). London, UK: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Austin, P. C. (2011a). An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46, 399–424.
Austin, P. C. (2011b). A tutorial and case study in propensity score analysis: An application to estimating the effect of in-hospital smoking cessation counseling on mortality. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46, 119–151.
Cham, H., & West, S. G. (2016). Propensity score analysis with missing data. Psychological Methods, 21, 427–445.
Cochran, W. G. (1968). The effectiveness of adjustment by subclassification in removing bias in observational studies. Biometrics, 24, 295–313.
Cook, T. D., & Steiner, P. M. (2010). Case matching and the reduction of selection bias in quasi-experiments: The relative importance of pretest measures of outcome, of unreliable measurement, and of mode of data analysis. Psychological Methods, 15, 56–68.
D’Agostino, R. B., Jr. (1998). Tutorial in Biostatistics: Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Statistics in Medicine, 17, 2265–2281.
Everitt, B. S. (1977). The analysis of contingency tables. London, UK: Chapman and Hall.
Imai, K., & van Dijk, D. A. (2004). Causal inference with general treatment regimes: Generalizing the propensity score. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 99, 854–866.
Luellen, J. K., Shadish, W. R., & Clark, M. H. (2005). Propensity scores: An introduction and experimental test. Evaluation Review, 29, 530–558.
Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–55.
Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1984). Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79, 516–524.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin.
Steiner, P. M., Cook, T. D., & Shadish, W. R. (2011). On the importance of reliable covariate measurement in selection bias adjustments using propensity scores. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 36, 213–236.
Stuart, E. A. (2010). Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Statistical Science, 25, 1–21.
Thoemmes, F. J., & Kim, E. S. (2011). A systematic review of propensity score methods in the social sciences. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46, 90–118.
van Belle, G. (2002). Statistical rules of thumb. New York, NY: Wiley.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mellenbergh, G.J. (2019). Propensity Scores. In: Counteracting Methodological Errors in Behavioral Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12272-0_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12272-0_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-74352-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-12272-0
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)