Timeline for Parameter identification v. causal identification
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 13, 2020 at 14:51 | comment | added | mlofton | good to know. thanks. | |
| Mar 13, 2020 at 4:47 | comment | added | dimitriy | I am not sure the latter is the case in economics. I think there is some disagreement about value of Pearl's approach among economists, though also some recent dialogue about the merits of the potential outcomes approach versus the do-calculus for research and for teaching. I think Imbens' working paper is good start on the difference. | |
| Mar 13, 2020 at 4:37 | comment | added | mlofton | @Dimitry V. Masterov Thanks for your comment. And I agree, That's why I mentioned Judea Pearl. Granger was no slouch in any sense of the word ( nobel in 2003 with Engle ) but when it comes to causaility, I'm pretty certain that Pearl is the person these days. | |
| Mar 13, 2020 at 4:04 | comment | added | dimitriy | Granger causality is a very particular type of causality, which is why it is usually prefaced with the G-adjective. Many, if not most, would not even consider it as such. A bit more on that here. I think Granger did his work at a time when these ideas were not as well developed as they are now, but the terminology stuck. | |
| Mar 13, 2020 at 1:27 | history | answered | mlofton | CC BY-SA 4.0 |