























Abstract:Political scientists often interpret coefficient shrinkage under fixed effects as evidence that pooled associations are confounded. This paper shows why that inference is unreliable for slow-moving, mismeasured regressors. Fixed effects can remove much of the signal and identify coefficients from within-unit variation that is disproportionately measurement error, attenuating estimates toward zero. A lone fixed effects coefficient may therefore be unable to distinguish confounding from measurement error. I show that the attenuation depends on a regressor's empirical intraclass correlation and measurement reliability. I then propose a default workflow for panel regression. Researchers estimate reliability when possible, report pooled and fixed effects estimates with corrected within reliability, use partial identification bounds when the estimates share a sign, and report fixed effects as a within-unit estimate when they do not. For variables with no reliability estimate, I introduce an autocorrelation frontier that bounds the attenuation factor directly. I conclude by applying this workflow to several published results to show that the data often cannot distinguish attenuation from confounding, and the workflow makes clear which case the researcher faces.
From: Andrew Rosenberg [view email]
[v1]
Fri, 12 Jun 2026 01:02:15 UTC (418 KB)
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理,仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。