liveBook · Manning

Randomization

As explained in Causal Inference for Data Science

Randomization is the random assignment of participants or units to experimental groups or treatment conditions.

Randomization assigns participants or units to experimental groups or treatment conditions by chance. In an A/B test or randomized controlled trial, this makes the groups comparable on average when the sample is sufficiently large, so differences in outcomes can estimate a causal effect rather than merely describe an association. section 1.3.4

Comparing treatments

Suppose one group receives an old treatment and another receives a new treatment. If 80% of the new-treatment group improves and 70% of the old-treatment group improves, the difference in group averages is the average treatment effect (ATE). Random assignment supports interpreting this difference as the effect of the treatment, provided execution is careful. section 1.3.4

Randomization can also serve as an instrumental variable when treatment uptake is imperfect. In a noncompliant clinical trial, patients may choose whether to take the assigned treatment, so their characteristics can confound comparisons between treated and untreated patients. Group randomization remains independent of those choices and can support instrumental-variable estimation. section 9.1.3

Figure 9.2 Instrumental variables diagram. The variable Randomization plays the role of an instrument, and the set of confounders Customer Context is unobserved.
figure

The diagram traces Randomization into experimental groups, distinguishes assignment from chatbot usage, and shows how unobserved customer context confounds usage and engagement. section 9.1.1

How Causal Inference for Data Science covers it

How deep it goes
Explains assignment, execution risks, balance, ATE interpretation, confounding, and noncompliance, while deferring detailed IV estimation.
Examples
Uses website A/B tests, clinical treatments, chatbot access, customer engagement, and binary recovery outcomes.
What it assumes
Assumes familiarity with experimental groups and outcomes, while introducing confounding, ATE, instrumental variables, and intention-to-treat terminology.
What you can do after
Evaluate causal treatment differences using randomized group averages while recognizing execution errors and treatment noncompliance.
How it connects
Connects experimental groups with causal inference, average treatment effect, confounding, instrumental variables, and intention-to-treat analysis.

Also explained in

Compare how 5 books explain randomization →

Related concepts

This explainer was generated by Manning's knowledge graph from the text of Causal Inference for Data Science. The section links point to the parts of the book it draws on.