Which Policy Works, and Where? Estimation and Inference for State-Level Treatment Effects in Difference-in-Differences
Nichole Austin, Sunny R. Karim, Erin Strumpf, Matthew D. Webb
Abstract
Policies with a common objective and implementation date may differ in details or context. We distinguish the aggregate average treatment effect on the treated (ATT) from sub-aggregate ATTs defined by implementation cohort, jurisdiction, period, or policy type. UN-DID and DID-INT, two DiD estimators that construct jurisdiction-by-time effects, estimate these ATTs under parallel-trends conditions matched to the aggregation. In CPS placebo-law simulations, randomization inference is generally well-sized, though some jurisdiction-specific tests are conservative. The jackknife can be undefined for sub-aggregate ATTs; when defined, it over-rejects with few treated or comparison jurisdictions. Estimands and inference methods should match the policy question and implementation setting.
Create a lesson
Related papers
Estimation risk in conditional expectiles
Marcelo Fernandes, Vitor Henriques, Eduardo Fonseca Mendes
Headline Estimation with Multiple Research Designs
Vod Vilfort
Robust Variance Estimation in Linear Regression: A Projection-Geometry Perspective
Yanping Chen
Manipulation Testing in Boundary Discontinuity Designs
Federico A. Bugni, Federico Crippa, Daniel Restrepo
Moments of Random Coefficients in Short Panels
Irene Botosaru, James L. Powell
When Can We Work in Embedding Space? What Text Embeddings Preserve
Simon Freyaldenhoven