2
$\begingroup$

Say we have a confounder $U$ between $X$ and $Y$, i.e. graphically, $U\rightarrow X$ and $U \rightarrow Y$, $X$ and $Y$ are not directly connected.

According to the d-seperation rule, I know conditioning on $U$ will break the correlation between $X$ and $Y$, i.e. $X\perp Y|U$.

However, what I want to ask is that, if we have a parent of $U$, say $P \rightarrow U \rightarrow X$, and $P \rightarrow U \rightarrow Y$, $X$ and $Y$ are not directly connected. Will conditioning on $P$ d-seperate the correlation between $X$ and $Y$, i.e. $X \perp Y|P$?

I think of this problem using the structure causal model (SCM). I think conditioning on $P$ will not entirely break the correlation between $X$ and $Y$, because $u=f(p)+\epsilon$, and the exogenous variable $\epsilon$ is assumed to be independent with $P$.

Don't know whether my thinking is correct. Hopeful for some help. Thanks in advance!

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

It's possible that conditioning on $P$ will weaken the correlation between $X$ and $Y.$ However, it will not $d$-separate $X$ and $Y,$ because causal information can still flow along the backdoor path $X\leftarrow U\to Y.$

What you might be thinking of is if you condition on a child of a collider, that also opens up the collider to allow causal information to pass through. That is, suppose you have the graph $X\to Z,\;Y\to Z,\;Z\to T.$ There is a collider at $Z,$ but if it is unconditioned, causal information cannot flow from $X$ to $Y.$ If you condition on $Z,$ causal information can flow. But it is also the case that if you condition on $T,$ causal information can flow from $X$ to $Y.$

Conditioning on parents of colliders, chains, or forks does not inherently change the nature of those connections, though it might change correlations somewhat.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.