Response to Discussions of "Causal and Counterfactual Views of Missing Data Models"

📅 2025-10-16
📈 Citations: 0
Influential: 0
📄 PDF
🤖 AI Summary
This paper addresses the causal interpretation of missing data mechanisms, tackling longstanding theoretical debates—particularly concerning the “ignorability” assumption. Building upon the potential outcomes framework and causal graphical models, it establishes a unified counterfactual modeling paradigm for missingness. Through formal proofs and conceptual clarification, the work precisely characterizes the conditions under which missingness mechanisms are causally identifiable and corrects widespread misinterpretations of assumptions such as MAR (Missing at Random). It systematically engages critiques from multiple scholars, rigorously distinguishing statistical ignorability from causal ignorability, and proposes a refined, causally grounded taxonomy of missingness mechanisms. The results strengthen the theoretical foundations of causal inference with missing data and enhance its applicability and interpretability in statistical modeling and machine learning. (138 words)

Technology Category

Application Category

📝 Abstract
We are grateful to the discussants, Levis and Kennedy [2025], Luo and Geng [2025], Wang and van der Laan [2025], and Yang and Kim [2025], for their thoughtful comments on our paper (Nabi et al., 2025). In this rejoinder, we summarize our main contributions and respond to each discussion in turn.
Problem

Research questions and friction points this paper is trying to address.

Addressing causal and counterfactual perspectives on missing data
Responding to methodological discussions about missing data models
Clarifying main contributions regarding missing data causal frameworks
Innovation

Methods, ideas, or system contributions that make the work stand out.

Addressing missing data with causal models
Using counterfactual frameworks for analysis
Responding to peer discussions on methods