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。
| 断点差分设计× | 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≠ | 2016 | 1994 |
| 提出者≠ | Grembi, Nannicini & Troiano | Card & Krueger (canonical 1994 application); Angrist & Pischke (textbook treatment) |
| 类型≠ | Hybrid quasi-experimental causal design (RDD + DID) | Causal inference / panel regression |
| 开创性文献≠ | Grembi, V., Nannicini, T. & Troiano, U. (2016). Do Fiscal Rules Matter? A Difference-in-Discontinuities Design. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 8(3), 1-30. DOI ↗ | Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2009). Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion. Princeton University Press. ISBN: 978-0691120355 |
| 别名 | diff-in-disc, DiD-RDD, Süreksizliklerde Fark (Difference-in-Discontinuities) | diff-in-diff, DiD, Farkların Farkı (Diff-in-Diff) |
| 相关 | 5 | 5 |
| 摘要≠ | Difference-in-Discontinuities is a hybrid quasi-experimental design that fuses regression discontinuity (RDD) with difference-in-differences (DID), introduced by Grembi, Nannicini and Troiano (2016). It compares the discontinuity at the same cutoff value across two periods to isolate a causal effect. | 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 ↗ |
|
|