Sources of selection bias in evaluating social programs: An interpretation of conventional measures and evidence on the effectiveness of matching as a program evaluation method

This paper decomposes the conventional measure of selection bias in observational studies into three components. The first two components are due to differences in the distributions of characteristics between participant and nonparticipant (comparison) group members: the first arises from differences in the supports, and the second from differences in densities over the region of common support. The third component arises from selection bias precisely defined. Using data from a recent social experiment, we find that the component due to selection bias, precisely defined, is smaller than the first two components. However, selection bias still represents a substantial fraction of the experimental impact estimate. The empirical performance of matching methods of program evaluation is also examined. We find that matching based on the propensity score eliminates some but not all of the measured selection bias, with the remaining bias still a substantial fraction of the estimated impact. We find that the support of the distribution of propensity scores for the comparison group is typically only a small portion of the support for the participant group. For values outside the common support, it is impossible to reliably estimate the effect of program participation using matching methods. If the impact of participation depends on the propensity score, as we find in our data, the failure of the common support condition severely limits matching compared with random assignment as an evaluation estimator.

Using rare mutations to estimate population divergence times: A maximum likelihood approach

In this paper we propose a method to estimate by maximum likelihood the divergence time between two populations, specifically designed for the analysis of nonrecurrent rare mutations. Given the rapidly growing amount of data, rare disease mutations affecting humans seem the most suitable candidates for this method. The estimator RD, and its conditional version RDc, were derived, assuming that the population dynamics of rare alleles can be described by using a birth–death process approximation and that each mutation arose before the split of a common ancestral population into the two diverging populations. The RD estimator seems more suitable for large sample sizes and few alleles, whose age can be approximated, whereas the RDc estimator appears preferable when this is not the case. When applied to three cystic fibrosis mutations, the estimator RD could not exclude a very recent time of divergence among three Mediterranean populations. On the other hand, the divergence time between these populations and the Danish population was estimated to be, on the average, 4,500 or 15,000 years, assuming or not a selective advantage for cystic fibrosis carriers, respectively. Confidence intervals are large, however, and can probably be reduced only by analyzing more alleles or loci.

Maximum likelihood estimation of a migration matrix and effective population sizes in n subpopulations by using a coalescent approach

A maximum likelihood estimator based on the coalescent for unequal migration rates and different subpopulation sizes is developed. The method uses a Markov chain Monte Carlo approach to investigate possible genealogies with branch lengths and with migration events. Properties of the new method are shown by using simulated data from a four-population n-island model and a source–sink population model. Our estimation method as coded in migrate is tested against genetree; both programs deliver a very similar likelihood surface. The algorithm converges to the estimates fairly quickly, even when the Markov chain is started from unfavorable parameters. The method was used to estimate gene flow in the Nile valley by using mtDNA data from three human populations.