The author would like to amend an error in the above article as per the following:
In Rainey (Reference Rainey2023), I evaluate the point estimate suggested by King, Tomz, and Wittenberg (Reference King, Tomz and Wittenberg2000). They suggest that researchers “[a]verage the simulated values to obtain a point estimate” (p. 351). I show that this approach creates “simulation-induced bias” and recommend that researchers directly transform the maximum likelihood estimates instead.
In listing examples of software that implement the two approaches, I regrettably describe a new R package clarify incorrectly (Greifer et al. Reference Greifer, Worthington, Iacus and King2023). In footnote 1 and the second paragraph of the conclusion, I wrongly cite the new clarify for R as an example of software that uses the average of simulations as the point estimate.
Predecessors CLARIFY for Stata (version 2.0; Tomz et al., Reference Tomz, Wittenberg and King2003,) and Zelig (version 5.1.7; Imai et al., Reference Imai, King and Lau2008; Choirat et al., Reference Choirat, Honaker, Imai, King and Lau2018) use the average of simulations to compute a point estimate. clarify for R was released January 25, 2023 (version 0.1.0) as a replacement for the now-deprecated R package Zelig, and the new R package clarify “directly transform[s] maximum likelihood estimates of coefficients to obtain maximum likelihood estimates of the quantities of interest” as Rainey (Reference Rainey2023) suggests.