Title: Instrumental Variables: to Strengthen or not to Strengthen?

Abstract: Instrumental variables (IV) are extensively used to estimate treatment effects in the presence of unmeasured confounding; however, weak IVs are often encountered in empirical studies and may cause problems. Many studies have considered building a stronger IV from the original, possibly weak, IV in the design stage of a matched study at the cost of not using some of the samples in the analysis. It is widely accepted that strengthening an IV may render nonparametric tests more powerful and typically increases the power of sensitivity analyses. In this article, we argue that contrary to this conventional wisdom, although a strong IV is good, strengthening an IV may not be. We consider matched observational studies from three perspectives. First, we evaluate the trade-off between IV strength and sample size on nonparametric tests assuming the IV is valid and show that there are circumstances in which strengthening an IV increases power but other circumstances in which it decreases power. Second, we derive a necessary condition for a valid sensitivity analysis model with continuous doses. We show that the $\Gamma$ sensitivity analysis model, which has been previously used to come to the conclusion that strengthening an IV makes studies less sensitive to bias, does not apply to the continuous IV setting and thus this previously reached conclusion may be invalid. Third, we quantify the bias of the Wald estimator with a possibly invalid IV under an oracle called the asymptotic oracle bias and leverage it to develop a valid sensitivity analysis framework; under this framework, we show that strengthening an IV may amplify or mitigate the bias of the estimator, and may or may not increase the power of sensitivity analyses. We also discuss how to better adjust for the observed covariates when building an IV.