When Should We (Not) Interpret Linear IV Estimands as LATE?

Clicks: 14
ID: 333350
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #198 of 212 articles by views in The Review of Economic Studies

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 212 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract In this paper I revisit the interpretation of the linear instrumental variables (IV) estimand as a weighted average of conditional local average treatment effects (LATEs). I focus on a situation in which additional covariates are required for identification while the reduced-form and first-stage regressions may be misspecified due to an implicit homogeneity restriction on the effects of the instrument. I show that the weights on some conditional LATEs are negative and the IV estimand is no longer interpretable as a causal effect under a weaker version of monotonicity, i.e. when there are compliers but no defiers at some covariate values and defiers but no compliers elsewhere. The problem of negative weights disappears in the interacted specification of Angrist and Imbens (I1995), which avoids misspecification and seems to be underused in applied work. I illustrate my findings in an application to the causal effects of pretrial detention on case outcomes. In this setting, I reject the stronger version of monotonicity, demonstrate that the interacted instruments are sufficiently strong for consistent estimation using the jackknife methodology, and present several estimates that are economically and statistically different, depending on whether the interacted instruments are used.
Reference Key
openalex_W7223094727 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Tymon Słoczyńki
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal The Review of Economic Studies
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/restud/rdag116
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdag116
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.