Researchers often summarize mediation in clustered data with a single-level product-of-coefficients estimator. We show what this pooled analysis estimates and why the target depends on the design. The pooled a-path is weighted by the within-between variance composition of the treatment. The pooled b-path uses a different weight, based on the mediator variance that remains after residualizing on treatment and covariates. Because these weights generally differ, the pooled indirect effect can differ from a level-respecting combination of the within- and between-level indirect effects. We derive the pooled probability limit and split this difference into a nonlinearity term and a weight-mismatch term. Equal b-paths remove the distortion, but equal a-paths do not. Allowing the two weights to vary gives a bilinear surface with saddle geometry, sharp corner bounds, and a zero-distortion frontier. We also define a design-standardized indirect effect and practical diagnostics. Simulations verify the identities and show that a common decompose-first, cluster-weighted construction can overstate apparent distortion. In an ECLS-K:2011 illustration with 8,363 children in 753 baseline schools, the within-level weights were 0.723 and 0.896, a difference of -0.173 (95% bootstrap CI [-0.193, -0.151]). The conventional construction produced 1.76 times the absolute distortion of the identity-consistent construction. The identity-consistent AD interval included zero. Thus, the application shows unequal weighting and sensitivity to construction, not evidence of nonzero population distortion.
In difference-in-differences (DiD), researchers may use pre-treatment trends to select a control group for which the parallel-trends assumption appears plausible, with the aim of estimating the average treatment effect on the treated (ATT). Our earlier paper,Nakano and Hoshino (2016), and the present paper jointly prov...
Mediation analyses are increasingly conducted in randomized trials, but a sample size adequate for the total treatment effect may leave the natural indirect effect (NIE) or natural direct effect (NDE) substantially underpowered. Randomization does not extend to the mediator, so precision depends on the conditional medi...
We study randomized experiments involving two interacting populations, such as buyers and sellers in a marketplace. In the two-sided experiments we consider, we randomize the two populations separately and independently. For a pair consisting of one member from each population, the two assignments jointly determine one...
Peng-Fei Tian, Ji-Zhou Liu, Lei Shi et al.· 0 citations
We study difference-in-differences (DiD) designs in which a binary treatment changes an endogenous time-varying (continuous, discrete, or mixed) mediator that in turn affects an outcome. We allow for the inclusion of lagged outcomes in the model. Under our model assumptions, we show that the usual DiD estimand mixes th...
A common empirical strategy in triple-differences (DDD) is to include either covariate trends or covariate levels to a three-way fixed effects (3WFE) regression. This strategy is typically motivated by the conditional parallel gaps assumption which assumes that deviations from parallel trends are similar among units wi...
Causal mediation analysis decomposes the total effect of an intervention on an outcome into a direct pathway and an indirect pathway transmitted through a mediator, but standard methods typically summarize these pathways using population average effects. In many applications, however, the indirect effect may vary subst...
Jia-Qi Tong, Yi Zhao, Bhramar Mukherjee et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.