Rejective Sampling, Rerandomization and Regression Adjustment in Survey Experiments

TL;DR

This paper introduces a two-stage rerandomization method for survey experiments to improve covariate balance at both sampling and treatment stages, enhancing the accuracy and precision of causal effect estimates.

Contribution

It develops a novel two-stage rerandomization design and asymptotic theory, generalizing existing methods to improve covariate balance and estimator precision in survey experiments.

Findings

Rerandomization improves covariate balance.

Enhanced estimators lead to shorter confidence intervals.

Covariate adjustment further improves precision.

Abstract

Classical randomized experiments, equipped with randomization-based inference, provide assumption-free inference for treatment effects. They have been the gold standard for drawing causal inference and provide excellent internal validity. However, they have also been criticized for questionable external validity, in the sense that the conclusion may not generalize well to a larger population. The randomized survey experiment is a design tool that can help mitigate this concern, by randomly selecting the experimental units from the target population of interest. However, as pointed out by Morgan and Rubin (2012), chance imbalances often exist in covariate distributions between different treatment groups even under completely randomized experiments. Not surprisingly, such covariate imbalances also occur in randomized survey experiments. Furthermore, the covariate imbalances happen not only between different treatment groups, but also between the sampled experimental units and the overall population of interest. In this paper, we propose a two-stage rerandomization design that can actively avoid undesirable covariate imbalances at both the sampling and treatment assignment stages. We further develop asymptotic theory for rerandomized survey experiments, demonstrating that rerandomization provides better covariate balance, more precise treatment effect estimators, and shorter large-sample confidence intervals. We also propose covariate adjustment to deal with remaining covariate imbalances after rerandomization, showing that it can further improve both the sampling and estimated precision. Our work allows general relationship among covariates at the sampling, treatment assignment and analysis stages, and generalizes both rerandomization in classical randomized experiments (Morgan and Rubin 2012) and rejective sampling in survey sampling (Fuller 2009).