Inference on effect size after multiple hypothesis testing

Abstract

Significant treatment effects are often emphasized when interpreting and summarizing empirical findings in studies that estimate multiple, possibly many, treatment effects. Under this kind of selective reporting, conventional treatment effect estimates may be biased and their corresponding confidence intervals may undercover the true effect sizes. We propose new estimators and confidence intervals that provide valid inferences on the effect sizes of the significant effects after multiple hypothesis testing. Our methods are based on the principle of selective conditional inference and complement a wide range of tests, including step-up tests and bootstrap-based step-down tests. Our approach is scalable, allowing us to study an application with over 370 estimated effects. We justify our procedure for asymptotically normal treatment effect estimators. We provide two empirical examples that demonstrate bias correction and confidence interval adjustments for significant effects. The magnitude and direction of the bias correction depend on the correlation structure of the estimated effects and whether the interpretation of the significant effects depends on the (in)significance of other effects.