The microeconometric estimation of treatment effects—An overview

By Marco Caliendo, Reinhard Hujer. Social Science Research Network, 2006

161 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Some Practical Guidance for the Implementation of Propensity Score Matching (2008, background): “See Heckman and Robb (1985), Heckman et al. (1999), Blundell and Costa Dias (2002) or Caliendo and Hujer (2006) for a broader overview of evaluation strategies including situations where selection is also based on unobservable characteristics.”
High Noon for Microfinance Impact Evaluations: Re-investigating the Evidence from Bangladesh (2012, methodology): “Given the variables that the PnK data provide, the following propensity score model draws on Coleman (1999), Alexander (2001), Armendáriz de Aghion and Morduch (2005), Coleman (2006) and Chemin29 :”
Turning Unemployment into Self-Employment: Effectiveness of Two Start-Up Programmes (2008, background): “Weak overlap: Pr(D =1|W ) 1, for all W. 4See, e.g. Caliendo and Hujer (2006) for further discussion.”
Systematic Review. What is the evidence of the impact of microfinance on the well-being of poor people? (2011, background): “Hence, the mean differences in the outcomes of these individuals are understood to be effects of the treatment (Caliendo and Hujer 2005).”
Start-Up Subsidies for the Unemployed: Long-Term Evidence and Effect Heterogeneity (2011, methodology): “If the parameter of interest is ATT, the 10See, for example Caliendo and Hujer (2006) for further discussion.”