IDENTIFICATION AND INFERENCE IN NONLINEAR DIFFERENCE-IN-DIFFERENCES MODELS BY

By Susan Athey. 2003

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Synthetic Control Methods for Comparative Case Studies: Estimating the Effect of California’s Tobacco Control Program (2010, neutral): “In addition, we adopt the terms “region” or “unit” and “intervention” or “treatment,” which can be substituted for “country,” “state,” “city,” etc. and “event,” “shock,” “law,” etc., respectively for specific applications.”
Econometric Methods for Program Evaluation (2018, unknown): “Finally, Athey and Imbens (2006) provide a generalization of the difference in differences model to the case when Y0it is nonlinear in the unobserved confounder, µi.”
Using Experiments to Correct for Selection in Observational Studies (2020, unknown): “More specifically, it relates to the Changes-In-Changes approach in Athey and Imbens [2006] where functional form assumptions are avoided.”
Identification of Nonseparable Models Using Instruments With Small Support (2015, unknown): “12This part of the argument is similar to arguments used in Altonji and Matzkin (2005) and Athey and Imbens (2006).”
Fuzzy Differences-in-Differences (2015, unknown): “We derive the asymptotic behavior of our CIC estimators under the following assumption, which is similar to the one made by Athey and Imbens (2006) for the CIC estimators in sharp settings.”
Networks of innovators within and across borders. Evidence from patent data (2013, unknown): “In terms of the standard DiD formalism (Angrist and Krueger, 1999; Heckman et al., 1999; Athey and Imbens, 2006; Blundell and Costa Dias, 2009) the dummy border distinguishes treated units, i.”
Estimation of average treatment effects with panel data: Asymptotic theory and implementation (2017, unknown): “Violations to Abadie’s (2005) assumption 3.1 or to Athey and Imbens (2006) assumption 3.1 can lead to severely biased estimation results for the DID method.”
How Do Right-to-Carry Laws Affect Crime Rates? Coping with Ambiguity Using Bounded-Variation Assumptions (2015, unknown): “2 See, for example, Black and Nagin (1998), Ludwig (1998), Ayres and Donohue (2003), and Aneja et al.”
Valid post-selection inference (2013, unknown): “As for (7), an upper triangular X̃ can be obtained from a QR-decomposition based on a Gram-Schmidt procedure: X = QR, X̃ = R.”
Is Universal Child Care Leveling the Playing Field? (2015, unknown): “The local linear regression estimates support these findings: Most of the gains in earnings associated with the universal child care program relate to children of low income parents, whereas upper-class children actually experience a loss in earnings because of 4For example, as pointed out by Baker,”
Estimating Distributions of Treatment Effects with an Application to the Returns to Schooling and Measurement of the Effects of Uncertainty on College Choice (2003, unknown): “The current research program deals with (1) mobility and flexibility of labor, (2) internationalization of labor markets, (3) welfare state and labor market, (4) labor markets in transition countries, (5) the future of labor, (6) evaluation of labor market policies and projects and (7) general labor”
A Practical Guide to Counterfactual Estimators for Causal Inference with Time-Series Cross-Sectional Data (2020, unknown): “0 0 0 · · · 0   N×T Hard Impute Soft Impute Note: The above figure, adapted from Athey et al. (2021), illustrates how regularization works with IFEct— which selects two factors in this case—and MC.”