Causal modelling without introducing counterfactuals or abstract distributions

Benedikt H\"oltgen and Robert C. Williamson

Papers from arXiv.org

Abstract: The most common approach to causal modelling is the potential outcomes framework due to Neyman and Rubin. In this framework, outcomes of counterfactual treatments are assumed to be well-defined. This metaphysical assumption is often thought to be problematic yet indispensable. The conventional approach relies not only on counterfactuals but also on abstract notions of distributions and assumptions of independence that are not directly testable. In this paper, we construe causal inference as treatment-wise predictions for finite populations where all assumptions are testable; this means that one can not only test predictions themselves (without any fundamental problem) but also investigate sources of error when they fail. The new framework highlights the model-dependence of causal claims as well as the difference between statistical and scientific inference.

Date: 2024-07, Revised 2024-08
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-ecm
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/2407.17385 Latest version (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:arx:papers:2407.17385

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().