Showing 1 - 9 of 9
One of the perceived advantages of difference-in-differences (DiD) methods is that they do not explicitly restrict how units select into treatment. However, when justifying DiD, researchers often argue that the treatment is "quasi-randomly" assigned. We investigate what selection mechanisms are...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10013362377
This paper proposes new estimators for the propensity score that aim to maximize the covariate distribution balance among different treatment groups. Heuristically, our proposed procedure attempts to estimate a propensity score model by making the underlying covariate distribution of different...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012851228
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012483192
This article proposes doubly robust estimators for the average treatment effect on the treated (ATT) in difference-in-differences (DID) research designs. In contrast to alternative DID estimators, the proposed estimators are consistent if either (but not necessarily both) a propensity score or...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012850756
This paper proposes new nonparametric diagnostic tools to assess the asymptotic validity of different treatment effects estimators that rely on the correct specification of the propensity score. We derive a particular restriction relating the propensity score distribution of treated and control...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012902642
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10013399857
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10013464658
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014471452
This paper proposes a new class of nonparametric tests for the correct specification of generalized propensity score models. The test procedure is based on two different projection arguments, which lead to test statistics with several appealing properties. They accommodate high-dimensional...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012838282