Using Machine Learning to Test Causal Hypotheses in Conjoint Analysis

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2201.08343v1
• Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 18:23:12 GMT
• Title: Using Machine Learning to Test Causal Hypotheses in Conjoint Analysis
• Authors: Dae Woong Ham, Kosuke Imai, Lucas Janson
• Abstract summary: We propose a new hypothesis testing approach based on the conditional randomization test. Our methodology is solely based on the randomization of factors, and hence is free from assumptions.
• Score: 5.064097093575691
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Conjoint analysis is a popular experimental design used to measure multidimensional preferences. Researchers examine how varying a factor of interest, while controlling for other relevant factors, influences decision-making. Currently, there exist two methodological approaches to analyzing data from a conjoint experiment. The first focuses on estimating the average marginal effects of each factor while averaging over the other factors. Although this allows for straightforward design-based estimation, the results critically depend on the distribution of other factors and how interaction effects are aggregated. An alternative model-based approach can compute various quantities of interest, but requires researchers to correctly specify the model, a challenging task for conjoint analysis with many factors and possible interactions. In addition, a commonly used logistic regression has poor statistical properties even with a moderate number of factors when incorporating interactions. We propose a new hypothesis testing approach based on the conditional randomization test to answer the most fundamental question of conjoint analysis: Does a factor of interest matter {\it in any way} given the other factors? Our methodology is solely based on the randomization of factors, and hence is free from assumptions. Yet, it allows researchers to use any test statistic, including those based on complex machine learning algorithms. As a result, we are able to combine the strengths of the existing design-based and model-based approaches. We illustrate the proposed methodology through conjoint analysis of immigration preferences and political candidate evaluation. We also extend the proposed approach to test for regularity assumptions commonly used in conjoint analysis.

Related papers

• Globally-Optimal Greedy Experiment Selection for Active Sequential Estimation [1.1530723302736279]
  We study the problem of active sequential estimation, which involves adaptively selecting experiments for sequentially collected data. The goal is to design experiment selection rules for more accurate model estimation. We propose a class of greedy experiment selection methods and provide statistical analysis for the maximum likelihood.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-13T17:09:29Z)
• Decoding Susceptibility: Modeling Misbelief to Misinformation Through a Computational Approach [61.04606493712002]
  Susceptibility to misinformation describes the degree of belief in unverifiable claims that is not observable. Existing susceptibility studies heavily rely on self-reported beliefs. We propose a computational approach to model users' latent susceptibility levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T07:22:56Z)
• A Multiple kernel testing procedure for non-proportional hazards in factorial designs [4.358626952482687]
  We propose a Multiple kernel testing procedure to infer survival data when several factors are of interest simultaneously. Our method is able to deal with complex data and can be seen as an alternative to the omnipresent Cox model when assumptions such as proportionality cannot be justified.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-15T01:53:49Z)
• Equivariance Allows Handling Multiple Nuisance Variables When Analyzing Pooled Neuroimaging Datasets [53.34152466646884]
  In this paper, we show how bringing recent results on equivariant representation learning instantiated on structured spaces together with simple use of classical results on causal inference provides an effective practical solution. We demonstrate how our model allows dealing with more than one nuisance variable under some assumptions and can enable analysis of pooled scientific datasets in scenarios that would otherwise entail removing a large portion of the samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-29T04:54:06Z)
• Similarities and Differences between Machine Learning and Traditional Advanced Statistical Modeling in Healthcare Analytics [0.6999740786886537]
  Machine learning and statistical modeling are complementary, based on similar mathematical principles. Good analysts and data scientists should be well versed in both techniques and their proper application.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-07T14:36:46Z)
• Variance Minimization in the Wasserstein Space for Invariant Causal Prediction [72.13445677280792]
  In this work, we show that the approach taken in ICP may be reformulated as a series of nonparametric tests that scales linearly in the number of predictors. Each of these tests relies on the minimization of a novel loss function that is derived from tools in optimal transport theory. We prove under mild assumptions that our method is able to recover the set of identifiable direct causes, and we demonstrate in our experiments that it is competitive with other benchmark causal discovery algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-13T22:30:47Z)
• A Causal Direction Test for Heterogeneous Populations [10.653162005300608]
  Most causal models assume a single homogeneous population, an assumption that may fail to hold in many applications. We show that when the homogeneity assumption is violated, causal models developed based on such assumption can fail to identify the correct causal direction. We propose an adjustment to a commonly used causal direction test statistic by using a $k$-means type clustering algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-08T18:59:14Z)
• Marginal likelihood computation for model selection and hypothesis testing: an extensive review [66.37504201165159]
  This article provides a comprehensive study of the state-of-the-art of the topic. We highlight limitations, benefits, connections and differences among the different techniques. Problems and possible solutions with the use of improper priors are also described.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-17T18:31:58Z)
• Decision-Making with Auto-Encoding Variational Bayes [71.44735417472043]
  We show that a posterior approximation distinct from the variational distribution should be used for making decisions. Motivated by these theoretical results, we propose learning several approximate proposals for the best model. In addition to toy examples, we present a full-fledged case study of single-cell RNA sequencing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-17T19:23:36Z)
• A Survey on Causal Inference [64.45536158710014]
  Causal inference is a critical research topic across many domains, such as statistics, computer science, education, public policy and economics. Various causal effect estimation methods for observational data have sprung up.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-05T21:35:29Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.