Suppose a manufacturing firm has two factories (Factory 1 and Factory 2), and a single production process (Process A) that is used in both factories. A new process (Process B) is developed that potentially reduces production costs. To test whether Process B is less costly than Process A, an experiment is designed where:
Within each Factory, products are assigned randomly to Process A or Process B.
Production costs for each product are recorded.
Note that resources (i.e. materials, workers, equipment) are not reassigned across factories.
Let Yi be the cost of producing product i, let Xi be 1 if Process B is used to produce i and 0 if Process A is used, and let Wi be 1 if product i is produced in Factory 1 and 0 if it is produced in Factory 2.
In a regression of Yi on X, it is advisable to: 
	a.	
Exclude Wi as products are randomly assigned and including Wi would increase standard errors
 	b.	
Exclude Wi as it is uncorrelated with Xi
 	c.	
Include Wi as E(ui | Xi) ≠ 0, but E(Xi | Wi) = 0 
 	d.	
Include Wi as E(ui | Xi) ≠ 0, but E(ui | Xi, Wi) = E(ui | Wi) 

The correct answer is **(d) "Include Wi as E(ui | Xi) ≠ 0, but E(ui | Xi, Wi) = E(ui | Wi)"**. Here’s why:

### Explanation:
1. **Random Assignment of Products**:
   - In the experiment, products are randomly assigned to **Process A or Process B** within each factory. However, the factories themselves have different production environments (resources, workers, etc.), meaning there could be a systematic difference in production costs between Factory 1 and Factory 2. This introduces a potential bias that would not be captured by only including \(X_i\) (whether Process B is used or not).
  
2. **What the Error Term Represents**:
   - \(u_i\) represents the unobserved factors that affect the production cost \(Y_i\). These could include factory-specific effects (such as equipment, management efficiency, etc.).
   
   - If we don't control for the factory (\(W_i\)), then \(u_i\) might correlate with \(X_i\), because production costs could systematically vary across factories. In other words, **\(E(u_i | X_i) \neq 0\)**, because the error term captures unobserved factors that are correlated with the factory.

3. **Importance of Controlling for \(W_i\)**:
   - Including \(W_i\) controls for the differences between Factory 1 and Factory 2. By including \(W_i\) in the regression, we allow the error term to only vary within each factory, isolating the effect of switching from Process A to Process B.
   
   - When \(W_i\) is included, **\(E(u_i | X_i, W_i) = E(u_i | W_i)\)**, meaning the residual variation in production costs is now only due to within-factory differences (since factory-specific differences have been accounted for), making it valid to estimate the causal effect of \(X_i\) on \(Y_i\).

### Why the Other Options are Incorrect:
- **(a) Exclude \(W_i\) as products are randomly assigned and including \(W_i\) would increase standard errors**:
  - Random assignment helps ensure internal validity, but it doesn't eliminate the possibility of systematic differences between factories. Not including \(W_i\) could lead to biased estimates of the effect of \(X_i\) on \(Y_i\).

- **(b) Exclude \(W_i\) as it is uncorrelated with \(X_i\)**:
  - \(W_i\) and \(X_i\) might indeed be uncorrelated due to the random assignment of processes. However, \(W_i\) could still affect production costs, making it essential to include to avoid omitted variable bias.

- **(c) Include \(W_i\) as \(E(u_i | X_i) \neq 0\), but \(E(X_i | W_i) = 0\)**:
  - This statement is partially correct, but it doesn't fully justify why \(W_i\) should be included. \(W_i\) should be included because it captures factory-specific effects, which could influence \(u_i\).

Thus, **(d)** is the most comprehensive and correct option.

---

Would you like more details or have any questions? 

Here are five related questions:
1. How does random assignment of products within each factory affect the interpretation of \(X_i\)'s coefficient?
2. What are the potential consequences of omitting \(W_i\) from the regression?
3. Why might the standard errors increase if \(W_i\) is included, as mentioned in option (a)?
4. Can you explain how \(E(u_i | W_i) = 0\) impacts the estimation of treatment effects?
5. How would you modify the regression if additional factories were added to the experiment?

**Tip**: Including control variables, like \(W_i\), helps account for confounding factors, reducing bias in estimating the effect of the primary variable of interest.

Suppose a manufacturing firm has two factories (Factory 1 and Factory 2), and a single production process (Process A) that is used in both factories. A new process (Process B) is developed that potentially reduces production costs. To test whether Process B is less costly than Process A, an experiment is designed where: Within each Factory, products are assigned randomly to Process A or Process B. Production costs for each product are recorded. Note that resources (i.e. materials, workers, equipment) are not reassigned across factories. Let Yi be the cost of producing product i, let Xi be 1 if Process B is used to produce i and 0 if Process A is used, and let Wi be 1 if product i is produced in Factory 1 and 0 if it is produced in Factory 2. In a regression of Yi on X, it is advisable to: (a) Exclude Wi as products are randomly assigned and including Wi would increase standard errors, (b) Exclude Wi as it is uncorrelated with Xi, (c) Include Wi as E(ui | Xi) ≠ 0, but E(Xi | Wi) = 0, (d) Include Wi as E(ui | Xi) ≠ 0, but E(ui | Xi, Wi) = E(ui | Wi).

Explore the regression analysis of production costs in a two-factory system where processes A and B are compared. This problem involves concepts like causal inference and omitted variable bias, with a focus on understanding how to include control variables for more accurate results. Suitable for students at the undergraduate to graduate level in statistics or econometrics.

Math Problem Statement

Solution

Ask a new question for Free

By Image

Math Problem Analysis

Mathematical Concepts

Formulas

Theorems

Suitable Grade Level

Related Recommendation