Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Propensity Score Adjustment for Multiple Group Structural Equation Modeling

  • Published:
Psychometrika Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the behavioral and social sciences, quasi-experimental and observational studies are used due to the difficulty achieving a random assignment. However, the estimation of differences between groups in observational studies frequently suffers from bias due to differences in the distributions of covariates. To estimate average treatment effects when the treatment variable is binary, Rosenbaum and Rubin (1983a) proposed adjustment methods for pretreatment variables using the propensity score.

However, these studies were interested only in estimating the average causal effect and/or marginal means. In the behavioral and social sciences, a general estimation method is required to estimate parameters in multiple group structural equation modeling where the differences of covariates are adjusted.

We show that a Horvitz-Thompson-type estimator, propensity score weighted M estimator (PWME) is consistent, even when we use estimated propensity scores, and the asymptotic variance of the PWME is shown to be less than that with true propensity scores.

Furthermore, we show that the asymptotic distribution of the propensity score weighted statistic under a null hypothesis is a weighted sum of independent χ 21 variables.

We show the method can compare latent variable means with covariates adjusted using propensity scores, which was not feasible by previous methods. We also apply the proposed method for correlated longitudinal binary responses with informative dropout using data from the Longitudinal Study of Aging (LSOA). The results of a simulation study indicate that the proposed estimation method is more robust than the maximum likelihood (ML) estimation method, in that PWME does not require the knowledge of the relationships among dependent variables and covariates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amemiya, T. (1985). Advanced econometrics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akaike, H. (1973). Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In B.N. Petrox and F. Caski, (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Information Theory (pp. 267–81). Budapest: Akademiai Kiado.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P.M., & Bonett, D.G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–06.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P.M. (1983). Some contributions to efficient statistics in structural equation models: Specification and estimation of moment structure. Psychometrika, 48, 493–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, P.E. (1994). Nonparametric estimation of mean functionals with data missing at random. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 89, 81–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, B.R. (1983). Uniqueness and Fŕechet differentiability of functional solutions to maximum likelihood-type equations. Annals of Statistics, 11, 1196–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, G.M. (1987). A simplified approach to M-estimation with application to two-stage estimators. Journal of Econometrics, 34, 373–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foutz, R.V., & Srivastava, R.C. (1977). The performance of the likelihood ratio test when the model is incorrect. Annals of Statistics, 5, 1183–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gong, G., & Samaniego, F.J. (1981). Pseudo maximum likelihood estimation: Theory and applications. Annals of Statistics, 9, 861–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J.J., Ichimura, H., & Todd, P. (1997). Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: Evidence from evaluating a job training program. Review of Economic Studies, 64, 605–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, A.B. (1965). The environment and disease: Association or causation? Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 58, 295–00.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hirano, K., Imbens, G., & Ridder, G. (2003). Efficient estimation of average treatment effects using the estimated propensity score. Econometrica, 71, 1161–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffer, T.B. (1992). Middle school ability grouping and student achievement in science and mathematics. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14, 205–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horvitz, D.G., & Thompson, D.J. (1952). A generalization of sampling without replacement from a finite universe. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 47, 663–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, P.J. (1967). The behavior of the maximum likelihood estimates under nonstandard conditions. Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability (Vol. 1, pp. 221–33).

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, P.J. (1981). Robust statistics. New York: Wiley 10.1002/0471725250.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Imbens, G.W. (2000). The role of the propensity score in estimating dose—response functions. Biometrika, 87, 706–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K.G. (1970). A general method for the analysis of covariance structure. Biometrika, 57, 239–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K.G. (1971). Simultaneous factor analysis in several populations. Psychometrika, 36, 409–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, N.L., & Kotz, S. (1970). Distributions in statistics: Continuous univariate distributions (Vol. 2). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kano, Y., Berkane, M., & Bentler, P.M. (1993). Statistical inference based on pseudo-maximum likelihood estimators in elliptical populations. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88, 135–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, D. (1999). An extension of the propensity score adjustment method for the analysis of group differences in MIMIC models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 34, 467–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, J.F., Kalbfleisch, J.D., & Wild, C.J. (1999). Semiparametric methods for response-selective and missing data problems in regression. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 61, 413–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann, E.L., & Casella, G. (1998). Theory of point estimation (2nd. ed.). New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang, K.-Y., & Self, S.G. (1996). On the asymptotic behavior of the pseudolikelihood ratio test statistic. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 58, 785–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipsitz, S.R., Ibrahim, J.G., & Zhao, L.P. (1999). A weighted estimating equation for missing covariate data with properties similar to maximum likelihood. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94, 1147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McArdle, J.J. (1986). Latent variable growth within behavior genetic models. Behavior Genetics, 16, 163–00.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58, 525–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, B. (1984). A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered categorical, and continuous latent variable indicators. Psychometrika, 49, 115–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meredith, W., & Tisak, J. (1990). Latent curve analysis. Psychometrika, 55, 107–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics (1988). National educational longitudinal study of 1988. Washington, DC.

  • Parke, W.R. (1986). Pseudo maximum likelihood estimation: The asymptotic distribution. Annals of Statistics, 14, 355–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, D.A. (1982). The asymptotic effect of substituting estimators for parameters in certain types of statistics. Annals of Statistics, 10, 475–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robins, J.M., Rotnitzky, A., & Zhao, L.-P. (1995). Analysis of semiparametric regression models for repeated outcomes in the presence of missing data. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 106–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R. (1984). From association to causation in observational studies: The role of tests of strongly ignorable treatment assignment. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79, 41–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R. (1987). Model-based direct adjustment. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82, 387–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R., & Rubin, D.B. (1983a). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R., & Rubin, D.B. (1983b). Assessing sensitivity to an unobserved binary covariate in an observational study with binary outcome. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 45, 212–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotnitzky, A., & Robins, J.M. (1995). Semiparametric regression estimation in the presence of dependent censoring. Biometrika, 82, 805–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D. (1974). Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 688–01.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D.B. (1976). Inference and missing data. Biometrika, 63, 581–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D.B. (1977). Assignment to treatment group on the basis of a covariate. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 688–01.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D.B. (1985). The use of propensity scores in applied Bayesian inference. In J.M. Bernardo, M.H. Gedroot, D.V. Lindley, & A.F.M. Smith (Eds.), Bayesian statistics (Vol. 2, pp. 463–72). Amsterdam: North-Holland, Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sammel, M.D., Ryan, L.M., & Legler, J.M. (1997). Latent variable models for mixed discrete and continuous outcomes. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 59, 667–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sörbom, D. (1974). A general method for studying differences in factor means and factor structures between groups. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 27, 229–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka, J.S., & Huba, G.J. (1985). A general coefficient of determination for covariance structure models under arbitrary GLS estimation. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 42, 233–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka, J.S. (1993). Multifaceted conceptions of fit in structural equation models. In K.A. Bollen & J.S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 10–9). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ten Have, T.R., Reboussin, B.A., Miller, M.E., & Kunselman, A. (2002). Mixed effects logistic regression models for multiple longitudinal binary function limitation responses with informative drop-out and confounding by baseline outcomes. Biometrics, 58, 127–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Laan, M.J., & Robins, J.M. (2002). Unified methods for censored longitudinal data and causality. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren, J.R., & Lee, J.C. (2003). The impact of adolescent employment on high school dropout: Differences by individual and labor-market characteristics. Social Science Research, 32, 98–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, K.-H., and Bentler, P.M. (1997). Mean and covariance structure analysis: Theoretical and practical improvements. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 92, 767–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Tokyo, Japan

    Takahiro Hoshino, Hiroshi Kurata & Kazuo Shigemasu

  2. Department of Cognitive and Behavioral Science, The University of Tokyo, 4-3-5 yanaka, Taito-ku, Tokyo, 110-0001, Japan

    Takahiro Hoshino

Authors
  1. Takahiro Hoshino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hiroshi Kurata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kazuo Shigemasu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Takahiro Hoshino.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hoshino, T., Kurata, H. & Shigemasu, K. A Propensity Score Adjustment for Multiple Group Structural Equation Modeling. Psychometrika 71, 691–712 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-005-1370-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-005-1370-2

Key words

Search

Navigation