REVIEW 1 cited by
When Is Parallel Trends Sensitive to Functional Form?
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
This paper assesses when the validity of difference-in-differences depends on functional form. We provide a novel characterization: the parallel trends assumption holds under all strictly monotonic transformations of the outcome if and only if a stronger ``parallel trends''-type condition holds for the cumulative distribution function of untreated potential outcomes. This condition for parallel trends to be insensitive to functional form is satisfied if and essentially only if the population can be partitioned into a subgroup for which treatment is effectively randomly assigned and a remaining subgroup for which the distribution of untreated potential outcomes is stable over time. These conditions have testable implications, and we introduce falsification tests for the null that parallel trends is insensitive to functional form.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Stationary Errors and Quantile Regression in Short Panels
Under conditional time stationarity of panel disturbances, period-specific quantile projections on the full regressor history identify a common slope through diagonal-minus-off-diagonal contrasts, and quantile-varying...
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.