登录 注册

Choosing A Headline Estimand from Matching, DID, and Hybrid Designs: A Minimax-Regret Approach

🔗 访问原文
🔗 Access Paper

📝 摘要
Abstract

Researchers using panel data to estimate causal effects routinely choose among three approaches to using past outcomes: difference-in-differences (DID), conditioning on lagged outcomes (matching, M), and a hybrid that does both (DIDM). The corresponding identifying assumptions are non-nested, leaving little guidance on which to report. We give conditions under which the corresponding estimands are ordered, with DIDM bracketed between matching and DID. This makes DIDM the minimax-regret choice among the three under a broad class of loss functions. We recommend reporting DIDM as the headline estimate, with matching and DID as bounds. We illustrate in applications.

📊 文章统计
Article Statistics

基础数据
Basic Stats

137 浏览
Views
0 下载
Downloads
25 引用
Citations

引用趋势
Citation Trend

阅读国家分布
Country Distribution

阅读机构分布
Institution Distribution

月度浏览趋势
Monthly Views

相关关键词
Related Keywords

影响因子分析
Impact Analysis

6.00 综合评分
Overall Score
引用影响力
Citation Impact
浏览热度
View Popularity
下载频次
Download Frequency

📄 相关文章
Related Articles

海洋智能分析Ocean AI Analysis

正在分析中,请稍候…Analyzing, please wait…
海洋智能体 🌊
海洋智能体
AI科研助手 · 2188篇文献
我看到你正在阅读一篇文献,需要我帮你解读摘要、推荐相关论文,或者分析研究方法论吗?