因没阅读主编最新文章, 被知名期刊主编竟无情desk reject! 到底是什么方法方面的文章呢？

凡是搞计量经济的，都关注这个号了

邮箱：econometrics666@126.com

下面这篇文章作者David Bartram为一知名期刊的主编。据社群群友陈述，他在向该期刊投稿时，曾被David Bartram无情desk reject，理由是他没有查看该主编发表的最新文章中关于控制变量选择问题。从这位群友的经历，我们学到的经验教训是，无论何时何地都需要第一时间掌握期刊主编、副主编最新文章动向，不然在投稿过程中很吃亏。

正文

Bartram, D. Cross-Sectional Model-Building for Research on Subjective Well-Being: Gaining Clarity on Control Variables. Soc Indic Res 155, 725–743 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-020-02586-3

Happiness/well-being researchers who use quantitative analysis often do not give persuasive reasons why particular variables should be included as controls in their cross-sectional models. One commonly sees notions of a “standard set” of controls, or the “usual suspects”, etc. These notions are not coherent and can lead to results that are significantly biased with respect to a genuine causal relationship.

This article presents some core principles for making more effective decisions of that sort. The contribution is to introduce a framework (the “causal revolution”, e.g. Pearl and Mackenzie 2018）unfamiliar to many social scientists (though well established in epidemiology) and to show how it can be put into practice for empirical analysis of causal questions.  In simplified form, the core principles are: control for confounding variables, and do not control for intervening variables or colliders.  A more comprehensive approach uses directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) to discern models that meet a minimum/efficient criterion for identification of causal effects.

The article demonstrates this mode of analysis via a stylized investigation of the effect of unemployment on happiness.  Most researchers would include other determinants of happiness as controls for this purpose.  One such determinant is income—but income is an intervening variable in the path from unemployment to happiness, and including it leads to substantial bias.  Other commonly-used variables are simply unnecessary, e.g. religiosity and sex.  From this perspective, identifying the effect of unemployment on happiness requires controlling only for age and education; a small (parsimonious) model is evidently preferable to a more complex one in this instance.

1.什么时候应该使用回归分析？控制变量意味着什么？2.如何选择正确的因变量(控制变量)，让你的计量模型不再肮脏，3.调节变量, 中介变量和控制变量啥区别与联系? 4.控制、调节和中介变量，系说，5.核心解释变量A不显著, 但加入变量B后, 为什么A和B都显著了？6.被解释变量比解释变量的层级更高的模型设定合理么？7.审稿: 协变量何时重要? 哪个重要, 有多重要？8.三张图秒懂, 混淆, 中介, 调节, 对撞, 暴露, 结果和协变量的复杂关系，9.因果推断专题：6.再谈混淆变量，10.什么时候需要标准化回归模型中的变量？11.因果推断专题：1.混淆变量，12.虚拟变量回归模型是什么? 政策评估的前件，13.11种与机器学习相关的多元变量分析方法汇总，14.回归中各变量的数值相差过大有事, 又有什么问题？15.哦, 不, 回归符号反了, 我们该怎么办？16.回归系数与预期相反时, 我们能够采取的方法和思路有哪些？17.显著不显著的后背是什么, 非(半)参估计里解决内生性，18.在什么情况下多增加一个自变量后, 回归的R方会变小呢？19.控制变量选择问题: 如何鉴别好或不好的控制变量？附上14篇相关文章！20.如何测度不可观测变量遗漏的严重程度, 建议各位学者看过来！21.如何选择合适的工具变量, 基于既有文献的总结和解释！22.如何选择合适的工具变量, 基于既有文献的总结和解释！23.如何测度不可观测变量遗漏的严重程度, 建议各位学者看过来！24.社会网络计量经济学是什么？测度社会关系网中的同伴效应！25.社会网络分析最新文献和软件学习手册，26.添加一个新变量能使以前不显著的变量变得显著了？27.加入其他控制变量后, 估计系数的符号相反了？28.估计工具变量回归时, 是否必须将所有外生变量用作工具变量？29.实证分析观测数据的10条检查清单, 消除实证分析中许多潜在的虚假结果，30.可以在面板回归分析中使用时间序列解释变量或被解释变量吗？31.收入和年龄等变量是将其转化成有序离散变量还是当成连续变量进行回归呢？32.你确定找到一个好的工具变量了吗? 这将是一篇最值得你看的文章！

下面这些短链接文章属于合集，可以收藏起来阅读，不然以后都找不到了。