What Do Randomized Studies of Housing Mobility Demonstrate?: Causal Inference in the Face of Interference

TLDR: A frame-work for causal inference when interference is present is developed and a number of causal estimands of interest are defined, which are of great importance for a researcher who fails to recognize that a treatment is beneficial when in fact it is universally harmful.

Abstract: During the past 20 years, social scientists using observational studies have generated a large and inconclusive literature on neighborhood effects. Recent workers have argued that estimates of neighborhood effects based on randomized studies of housing mobility, such as the “Moving to Opportunity” (MTO) demonstration, are more credible. These estimates are based on the implicit assumption of no interference between units; that is, a subject's value on the response depends only on the treatment to which that subject is assigned, not on the treatment assignments of other subjects. For the MTO studies, this assumption is not reasonable. Although little work has been done on the definition and estimation of treatment effects when interference is present, interference is common in studies of neighborhood effects and in many other social settings (e.g., schools and networks), and when data from such studies are analyzed under the “no-interference assumption,” very misleading inferences can result. Furthermore, ...