Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T21:14:00.365Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Strategy and Sample Selection: A Strategic Selection Estimator

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2017

Lucas Leemann
Lucas Leemann*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Columbia University International Affairs Building, 420 W 118th Street, New York. e-mail: ltl2108@columbia.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

The development and proliferation of strategic estimators has narrowed the gap between theoretical models and empirical testing. But despite recent contributions that extend the basic strategic estimator, researchers have continued to neglect a classic social science phenomenon: selection. Compared to nonstrategic estimators, strategic models are even more prone to selection effects. First, external shocks or omitted variables can lead to correlated errors. Second, because the systematic parts of actors' utilities usually overlap on certain key variables, the two sets of explanatory variables are correlated. As a result, both the systematic and the stochastic components can be correlated. However, given that the estimates for the first mover are computed based on the potentially biased predicted probabilities of the second actor, we also generate biased estimates for the first actor. In applied work, researchers neglect the potential shortcomings due to selection bias. This article presents an alternative strategic estimator that takes selection into account and allows scholars to obtain consistent, unbiased, and efficient estimates in the presence of both selection and strategic action. I present a Monte Carlo analysis as well as a real-world application to illustrate the superior performance of this estimator relative to the standard practice.

Information

Type
Regular Articles
Information
Political Analysis , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , Summer 2014 , pp. 374 - 397
Copyright
Copyright © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Political Methodology 

References

Achen, C. 1986. The statistical analysis of quasi-experiments. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Bas, M. A., Signorino, C. S., and Walker, R. W. 2008. Statistical backwards induction: A simple method for estimating recursive strategic models. Political Analysis 16(1): 21–40.Google Scholar
Boyes, W. J., Hoffman, D. L., and Low, S. A. 1989. An econometric analysis of the bank credit scoring problem. Journal of Econometrics 40: 3–14.Google Scholar
Carrubba, C. J., Yuen, A., and Zorn, C. 2007. In defense of comparative statics: Specifying empirical tests of models of strategic interaction. Political Analysis 15: 465–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, J. 2005. Strategy, selection, and candidate competition in U.S. House and Senate elections. Journal of Politics 67(1): 1–28.Google Scholar
Carson, J. L. 2003. Strategic interaction and candidate competition in U.S. House elections: Empirical applications of probit and strategic probit models. Political Analysis 11: 368–80.Google Scholar
Chen, H.-C., Friedman, J. W., and Thisse, J.-F. 1997. Boundedly rational nash equilibrium: A probabilistic choice approach. Games and Economic Behavior 18(1): 32–54.Google Scholar
Clarke, K. A., and Signorino, C. S. 2010. Discriminating methods: Tests for non-nested discrete choice models. Political Studies 58: 368–88.Google Scholar
Fearon, J. D. 1995. Rationalist explanations for war. International Organization 49: 379–414.Google Scholar
Freedman, D. A., and Sekhon, J. S. 2010. Endogeneity in probit response models. Political Analysis 18(2): 138–50.Google Scholar
Gent, S. E. 2007. Strange bedfellows: The strategic dynamics of major power military interventions. Journal of Politics 69(4): 1089–102.Google Scholar
Greene, W. H. 2003. Econometric analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Hall, P. 2003. Aligning ontology and methodology in comparative politics. In Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences, eds. Mahoney, James and Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, 373–404. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heckman, J. J. 1974. Shadow prices, market wages, and labor supply. Econometrica 42: 679–94.Google Scholar
Heckman, J. J. 1976. The common structure of statistical models of truncation, sample selection and limited dependent variables and a simple estimator for such models. Annals of Economic and Social Measurement 5(4): 475–92.Google Scholar
Heckman, J. J. 1979. Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica 47(1): 153–61.Google Scholar
Hug, S., and Leemann, L. 2011. Modeling the strategic interactions in representative democracies with referendums. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the European Political Science Association, Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
Jones, D. M., Bremer, S. A., and Singer, J. D. 1996. Militarized interstate disputes, 1816–1992: Rationale, coding rules, and empirical patterns. Conflict Management and Peace Science 15(2): 163–213.Google Scholar
Kenkel, B., and Signorino, C. S. 2013. Estimating extensive form games in R. Working paper. http://www.rochester.edu/College/gradstudents/bkenkel/data/games.pdf (accessed December 11, 2013).Google Scholar
Leblang, D. 2003. To devalue or to defend? The political economy of exchange rate policy. International Studies Quarterly 47(4): 533–60.Google Scholar
Lewis, J. B., and Schultz, K. A. 2003. Revealing preferences: Empirical estimation of a crisis bargaining game with incomplete information. Political Analysis 11: 345–67.Google Scholar
Maddala, G. 1983. Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Manski, C. F. 1977. The structure of random utility models. Theory and Decision 8: 229–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKelvey, R. D., and Palfrey, T. R. 1995. Quantal response equilibria for normal form games. Games and Economic Behavior 10: 6–38.Google Scholar
McKelvey, R. D., and Palfrey, T. R. 1996. A statistical theory of equilibrium in games. Japanese Economic Review 47: 186–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKelvey, R. D., and Palfrey, T. R. 1998. Quantal response equilibria for extensive form games. Experimental Economics 1: 9–41.Google Scholar
Reed, W. 2000. A unified statistical model of conflict onset and escalation. American Journal of Political Science 44(1): 84–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sartori, A. E. 2003. An estimator for some binary-outcome selection models without exclusion restrictions. Political Analysis 11: 111–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Signorino, C. S. 1999. Strategic interaction and the statistical analysis of international conflict. American Political Science Review 93: 279–97.Google Scholar
Signorino, C. S. 2002. Strategy and selection in international relations. International Interactions 28(1): 93–115.Google Scholar
Signorino, C. S. 2003a. STRAT—A program for analyzing statistical strategic models version 1.4. Department of Political Science, University of Rochester.Google Scholar
Signorino, C. S. 2003b. Structure and uncertainty in discrete choice models. Political Analysis 11: 316–44.Google Scholar
Signorino, C. S., and Kenkel, B. 2012. Package “games.” R: A language and environment for statistical computing.Google Scholar
Signorino, C. S., and Ritter, J. M. 1999. Tau-b or not tau-b: Measuring the similarity of foreign policy positions. International Studies Quarterly 43: 115–44.Google Scholar
Signorino, C. S., and Tarar, A. 2006. A unified theory and test of extended immediate deterrence. American Journal of Political Science 50(3): 586–605.Google Scholar
Signorino, C. S., and Yilmaz, K. 2003. Strategic misspecification in regression models. American Journal of Political Science 47(3): 551–66.Google Scholar
Smith, A. 1999. Testing theories of strategic choice: The example of crisis escalation. American Journal of Political Science 43(4): 1254–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vuong, Q. H. 1989. Likelihood ratio tests for model selection and non-nested hypotheses. Econometrica 57(2): 307–33.Google Scholar