Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Robust Difference-in-differences Models

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

arxiv 2211.06710 v5 pith:BASLZ2HN submitted 2022-11-12 econ.EM

Robust Difference-in-differences Models

classification econ.EM
keywords assumptionperiodspre-treatmentapproachinformationmethodmultipleselection
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The difference-in-differences (DID) method identifies the average treatment effects on the treated (ATT) under mainly the so-called parallel trends (PT) assumption. The most common and widely used approach to justify the PT assumption is the pre-treatment period examination. If a null hypothesis of the same trend in the outcome means for both treatment and control groups in the pre-treatment periods is rejected, researchers believe less in PT and the DID results. This paper develops a robust generalized DID method that utilizes all the information available not only from the pre-treatment periods but also from multiple data sources. Our approach interprets PT in a different way using a notion of selection bias, which enables us to generalize the standard DID estimand by defining an information set that may contain multiple pre-treatment periods or other baseline covariates. Our main assumption states that the selection bias in the post-treatment period lies within the convex hull of all selection biases in the pre-treatment periods. We provide a sufficient condition for this assumption to hold. Based on the baseline information set we construct, we provide an identified set for the ATT that always contains the true ATT under our identifying assumption, and also the standard DID estimand. We extend our proposed approach to multiple treatment periods DID settings. We propose a flexible and easy way to implement the method. Finally, we illustrate our methodology through some numerical and empirical examples.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Compositional difference-in-differences

    econ.EM 2025-10 conditional novelty 5.0

    A difference-in-differences estimator for categorical outcomes that identifies counterfactual category counts and shares under proportional-growth parallel trends, with applications to early voting and RGGI.