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。
| 通过粗糙化精确匹配 (CEM) 进行政策评估× | 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≠ | 2011-2012 | 1994 |
| 提出者≠ | Iacus, King & Porro | Card & Krueger (canonical 1994 application); Angrist & Pischke (textbook treatment) |
| 类型≠ | Matching / quasi-experimental design | Causal inference / panel regression |
| 开创性文献≠ | 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 |
| 别名≠ | CEM, Coarsened Exact Matching, CEM policy evaluation, coarsening-based matching | diff-in-diff, DiD, Farkların Farkı (Diff-in-Diff) |
| 相关 | 5 | 5 |
| 摘要≠ | 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. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|