Related papers: Difference-in-Differences in the Presence of Unkno…
Recently, there has been a surge in methodological development for the difference-in-differences (DiD) approach to evaluate causal effects. Standard methods in the literature rely on the parallel trends assumption to identify the average…
In settings with few treated units, Difference-in-Differences (DID) estimators are not consistent, and are not generally asymptotically normal. This poses relevant challenges for inference. While there are inference methods that are valid…
We consider the problem of inference in Difference-in-Differences (DID) when there are few treated units and errors are spatially correlated. We first show that, when there is a single treated unit, some existing inference methods designed…
The Difference-in-Differences (DiD) method is a fundamental tool for causal inference, yet its application is often complicated by missing data. Although recent work has developed robust DiD estimators for complex settings like staggered…
Difference-in-differences (DiD) is one of the most popular approaches for empirical research in economics, political science, and beyond. Identification in these models is based on the conditional parallel trends assumption: In the absence…
We consider the identification of average treatment effects on the treated (ATT) in difference-in-differences (DiD) settings in the presence of endogenous sample selection. We first establish that the conventional DiD estimand generally…
Difference-in-differences (DID) is commonly used to estimate treatment effects but is infeasible in settings where data are unpoolable due to privacy concerns or legal restrictions on data sharing, particularly across jurisdictions. In this…
In longitudinal studies where units are embedded in space or a social network, interference may arise, meaning that a unit's outcome can depend on treatment histories of others. The presence of interference poses significant challenges for…
The difference-in-differences (DID) method identifies the average treatment effects on the treated (ATT) under mainly the so-called parallel trends (PT) assumption. The most common and widely used approach to justify the PT assumption is…
Difference-in-Differences (DiD) and Synthetic Control (SC) are widely used methods for causal inference in panel data, each with distinct strengths and limitations. We propose a novel method for short-panel causal inference that integrates…
The method of difference-in-differences (DID) is widely used to study the causal effect of policy interventions in observational studies. DID employs a before and after comparison of the treated and control units to remove bias due to…
Many research questions in public health and medicine concern sustained interventions in populations defined by substantive priorities. Existing methods to answer such questions typically require a measured covariate set sufficient to…
NOTE: This preprint has a flawed theoretical formulation. Please avoid it and refer to the ICLR22 publication https://openreview.net/forum?id=q7n2RngwOM. Also, arXiv:2109.15062 contains some new ideas on unobserved Confounding. As an…
Researchers commonly use difference-in-differences (DiD) designs to evaluate public policy interventions. While methods exist for estimating effects in the context of binary interventions, policies often result in varied exposures across…
Difference-in-differences (DiD) identification relies mainly on a parallel trends assumption about untreated potential outcomes. Researchers often relax this assumption by assuming conditional parallel trends within units with the same…
Difference-in-differences (DID) is a popular approach to identify the causal effects of treatments and policies in the presence of unmeasured confounding. DID identifies the sample average treatment effect in the treated (SATT). However, a…
Many studies exploit variation in the timing of policy adoption across units as an instrument for treatment. This paper formalizes the underlying identification strategy as an instrumented difference-in-differences (DID-IV). In this design,…
Randomized experiments are the gold standard for causal inference. However, traditional assumptions, such as the Stable Unit Treatment Value Assumption (SUTVA), often fail in real-world settings where interference between units is present.…
This paper proposes a novel approach for estimating treatment effects in panel data settings, addressing key limitations of the standard difference-in-differences (DID) approach. The standard approach relies on the parallel trends…
Causal inference on a population of units connected through a network often presents technical challenges, including how to account for interference. In the presence of local interference, for instance, potential outcomes of a unit depend…