Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hainmueller, Jens, Liu, Jiehan, Liu, Ziyi, Mummolo, Jonathan, Xu, Yiqing
Format: Preprint
Published: 2025
Subjects:
Online Access:https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.05717
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866929705882484736
author Hainmueller, Jens
Liu, Jiehan
Liu, Ziyi
Mummolo, Jonathan
Xu, Yiqing
author_facet Hainmueller, Jens
Liu, Jiehan
Liu, Ziyi
Mummolo, Jonathan
Xu, Yiqing
contents Simonsohn (2024a) and Simonsohn (2024b) critique Hainmueller, Mummolo and Xu (2019, HMX), arguing that failing to model nonlinear relationships between the treatment and moderator leads to biased marginal effect estimates and uncontrolled Type-I error rates. While these critiques highlight the issue of under-modeling nonlinearity in applied research, they are fundamentally flawed in several key ways. First, the causal estimand for interaction effects and the necessary identifying assumptions are not clearly defined in these critiques. Once properly stated, the critiques no longer hold. Second, the kernel estimator HMX proposes recovers the true causal effects in the scenarios presented in these recent critiques, which compared effects to the wrong benchmark, producing misleading conclusions. Third, while Generalized Additive Models (GAM) can be a useful exploratory tool (as acknowledged in HMX), they are not designed to estimate marginal effects, and better alternatives exist, particularly in the presence of additional covariates. Our response aims to clarify these misconceptions and provide updated recommendations for researchers studying interaction effects through the estimation of conditional marginal effects.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2502_05717
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle A Response to Recent Critiques of Hainmueller, Mummolo and Xu (2019) on Estimating Conditional Relationships
Hainmueller, Jens
Liu, Jiehan
Liu, Ziyi
Mummolo, Jonathan
Xu, Yiqing
Methodology
Simonsohn (2024a) and Simonsohn (2024b) critique Hainmueller, Mummolo and Xu (2019, HMX), arguing that failing to model nonlinear relationships between the treatment and moderator leads to biased marginal effect estimates and uncontrolled Type-I error rates. While these critiques highlight the issue of under-modeling nonlinearity in applied research, they are fundamentally flawed in several key ways. First, the causal estimand for interaction effects and the necessary identifying assumptions are not clearly defined in these critiques. Once properly stated, the critiques no longer hold. Second, the kernel estimator HMX proposes recovers the true causal effects in the scenarios presented in these recent critiques, which compared effects to the wrong benchmark, producing misleading conclusions. Third, while Generalized Additive Models (GAM) can be a useful exploratory tool (as acknowledged in HMX), they are not designed to estimate marginal effects, and better alternatives exist, particularly in the presence of additional covariates. Our response aims to clarify these misconceptions and provide updated recommendations for researchers studying interaction effects through the estimation of conditional marginal effects.
title A Response to Recent Critiques of Hainmueller, Mummolo and Xu (2019) on Estimating Conditional Relationships
topic Methodology
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.05717