causality not clear

送交者: 水手于 2008-03-25, 11:37:05:

回答: 乐善好施带来幸福感 (ZT) 由 Latino2 于 2008-03-25, 08:34:50:

people who spend money gifts for other people most likely are pretty well off to begin with, the causality can run the other way.

Income != wealth.

Besides, it may not be the absolute wealth that matters, what matters may be the perception of wealth. If you feel "pretty well off", you may feel like giving. Again, causality runs the other way.

This is stupid "science".

所有跟贴:

this problem is also solved in the 3rd one: - mangolasi (155 bytes) 2008-03-25, 13:34:41 (213752)
The paper is not about wealth. You shot on a wrong target. (无内容) - Latino2 (0 bytes) 2008-03-25, 12:22:42 (213732)
- I know, they used income, that's exactly my point (NT) (无内容) - 水手 (0 bytes) 2008-03-25, 12:43:48 (213734)
  - income/wealth should be a control variable - Enlighten (609 bytes) 2008-03-25, 13:01:46 (213739)
    - Causality is a common problem in econometrics - 水手 (578 bytes) 2008-03-25, 13:15:52 (213743)
      - But if can control ALL other factors, you CAN establish causality - Enlighten (301 bytes) 2008-03-25, 13:34:36 (213750)
        
        "the event that happens earlier in time is usually the cause" - mangolasi (54 bytes) 2008-03-25, 13:37:03 (213753)
      - here endogeneity rather than reversed causality is the main issue - mangolasi (377 bytes) 2008-03-25, 13:30:48 (213748)
        
        endogeneity is not equivalent to reverse causality - 水手 (925 bytes) 2008-03-25, 13:57:32 (213761)
        
        by 'treatment' i mean something like instrumental variables, can't - mangolasi (47 bytes) 2008-03-25, 13:32:44 (213749)

加跟贴