This paper proposes an asymptotically valid permutation test for a testable implication of the identification assumption in the regression discontinuity design (RDD). Here, by testable implication, we mean the requirement that the distribution of observed baseline covariates should not change discontinuously at the threshold of the so-called running variable. This contrasts to the common practice of testing the weaker implication of continuity of the means of the covariates at the threshold. When testing our null hypothesis using observations that are “close ” to the threshold, the standard requirement for the finite sample validity of a permutation test does not necessarily hold. We therefore propose an asymptotic framework where there is a fixed number of closest observations to the threshold with the sample size going to infinity, and propose a permutation test based on the so-called induced order statistics that controls the limiting rejection probability under the null hypothesis. In a simulation study, we find that the new test controls size remarkably well in most designs. Finally, we use our test to evaluate the validity of the design in Lee (2008), a well-known application of the RDD to study incumbency advantage.

This paper studies the wild bootstrap–based test proposed in Cameron, Gelbach, and Miller (2008). Existing analyses of its properties require that number of clusters is “large.” In an asymptotic framework in which the number of clusters is “small,” we provide conditions under which an unstudentized version of the test is valid. These conditions include homogeneity-like restrictions on the distribution of covariates. We further establish that a studentized version of the test may only overreject the null hypothesis by a “small” amount that decreases exponentially with the number of clusters. We obtain a qualitatively similar result for “score” bootstrap-based tests, which permit testing in nonlinear models.

The decisions of judges, lenders, journal editors, and other gatekeepers often lead to significant disparities across affected groups. An important question is whether, and to what extent, these group-level disparities are driven by relevant differences in underlying individual characteristics or by biased decision makers. Becker (1957, 1993) proposed an outcome test of bias based on differences in post-decision outcomes across groups, inspiring a large and growing empirical literature. The goal of our paper is to offer a methodological blueprint for empirical work that seeks to use outcome tests to detect bias. We show that models of decision making underpinning outcome tests can be usefully recast as Roy models, since heterogeneous potential outcomes enter directly into the decision maker’s choice equation. Different members of the Roy model family, however, are distinguished by the tightness of the link between potential outcomes and decisions. We show that these distinctions have important implications for defining bias, deriving logically valid outcome tests of such bias, and identifying the marginal outcomes that the test requires.

This paper examines three distinct hypothesis testing problems that arise in the context of identification of some nonparametric models with endogeneity. The first hypothesis testing problem we study concerns testing necessary conditions for identification in some nonparametric models with endogeneity involving mean independence restrictions. These conditions are typically referred to as completeness conditions. The second and third hypothesis testing problems we examine concern testing for identification directly in some nonparametric models with endogeneity involving quantile independence restrictions. For each of these hypothesis testing problems, we provide conditions under which any test will have power no greater than size against any alternative. In this sense, we conclude that no nontrivial tests for these hypothesis testing problems exist.

This paper studies the behavior, under local misspecification, of several confidence sets (CSs) commonly used in the literature on inference in moment (in)equality models. We propose the amount of asymptotic confidence size distortion as a criterion to choose among competing inference methods. This criterion is then applied to compare across test statistics and critical values employed in the construction of CSs. We find two important results under weak assumptions. First, we show that CSs based on subsampling and generalized moment selection (Andrews and Soares (2010)) suffer from the same degree of asymptotic confidence size distortion, despite the fact that asymptotically the latter can lead to CSs with strictly smaller expected volume under correct model specification. Second, we show that the asymptotic confidence size of CSs based on the quasi-likelihood ratio test statistic can be an arbitrary small fraction of the asymptotic confidence size of CSs based on the modified method of moments test statistic.

This paper develops a theory of randomization tests under an approximate symmetry as-sumption. Randomization tests provide a general means of constructing tests that control size in finite samples whenever the distribution of the observed data exhibits symmetry under the null hypothesis. Here, by exhibits symmetry we mean that the distribution remains invariant under a group of transformations. In this paper, we provide conditions under which the same construction can be used to construct tests that asymptotically control the probability of a false rejection whenever the distribution of the observed data exhibits approximate symmetry in the sense that the limiting distribution of a function of the data exhibits symmetry under the null hypothesis. An important application of this idea is in settings where the data may be grouped into a fixed number of “clusters ” with a large number of observations within each cluster. In such settings, we show that the distribution of the observed data satisfies our ap-proximate symmetry requirement under weak assumptions. In particular, our results allow for the clusters to be heterogeneous and also have dependence not only within each cluster, but also across clusters. This approach enjoys several advantages over other approaches in these settings. Among other things, it leads to a test that is asymptotically similar, which, as shown in a simulation study, translates into improved power at many alternatives. Finally, we use our results to revisit the analysis of Angrist and Lavy (2009), who examine the impact of a cash award on exam performance for low-achievement students in Israel.