方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法；存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 反事实影响评估 (CIE)× | 双重差分法 (Diff-in-Diff)× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域≠ | 因果推断 | 计量经济学 |
| 方法族 | Regression model | Regression model |
| 起源年份≠ | 1970s–2000s | 1994 |
| 提出者≠ | Heckman, Imbens, Rubin, and the program evaluation literature | Card & Krueger (canonical 1994 application); Angrist & Pischke (textbook treatment) |
| 类型≠ | Causal inference / program evaluation | Causal inference / panel regression |
| 开创性文献≠ | Heckman, J. J., & Vytlacil, E. J. (2007). Econometric evaluation of social programs, Part I: Causal models, structural models and econometric policy evaluation. Handbook of Econometrics, 6B, 4779-4874. DOI ↗ | Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2009). Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion. Princeton University Press. ISBN: 978-0691120355 |
| 别名≠ | CIE, counterfactual evaluation, counterfactual policy evaluation, impact evaluation | diff-in-diff, DiD, Farkların Farkı (Diff-in-Diff) |
| 相关 | 5 | 5 |
| 摘要≠ | Counterfactual Impact Evaluation is a family of causal methods that estimates the effect of an intervention by comparing what actually happened to participants with what would have happened had the intervention not taken place. Formalised in the Rubin Causal Model and extended by Heckman, Imbens and others, CIE underlies most modern program and policy evaluation practice. | 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. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|