השוואת שיטות
סקרו את השיטות שבחרתם זו לצד זו; שורות שבהן יש הבדל מודגשות.
| הערכת מדיניות באמצעות התאמה מדויקת מקורצפת (CEM)× | הפרש-בהפרשים (דיד)× | |
|---|---|---|
| תחום≠ | הסקה סיבתית | אקונומטריקה |
| משפחה | Regression model | Regression model |
| שנת המקור≠ | 2011-2012 | 1994 |
| הוגה השיטה≠ | Iacus, King & Porro | Card & Krueger (canonical 1994 application); Angrist & Pischke (textbook treatment) |
| סוג≠ | Matching / quasi-experimental design | Causal inference / panel regression |
| מקור מכונן≠ | Iacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2012). Causal inference without balance checking: Coarsened exact matching. Political Analysis, 20(1), 1-24. DOI ↗ | Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2009). Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion. Princeton University Press. ISBN: 978-0691120355 |
| כינויים≠ | CEM, Coarsened Exact Matching, CEM policy evaluation, coarsening-based matching | diff-in-diff, DiD, Farkların Farkı (Diff-in-Diff) |
| קשורות | 5 | 5 |
| תקציר≠ | Coarsened Exact Matching (CEM) is a quasi-experimental causal-inference technique that creates balanced treatment and control groups from observational data by temporarily coarsening covariates into bins, exactly matching units within those bins, and then pruning unmatched observations before estimating policy effects. Introduced by Iacus, King, and Porro, CEM belongs to the monotonic imbalance bounding family of matching methods and is especially popular in policy evaluation. | Difference-in-Differences is a causal-inference method that estimates the effect of an intervention by comparing how a treatment group and a control group change over time. Made famous by Card and Krueger's 1994 minimum-wage study and developed in Angrist and Pischke's Mostly Harmless Econometrics, it isolates the treatment effect as the difference between the two groups' before-after changes. |
| ScholarGateמערך נתונים ↗ |
|
|