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。
| 政策评估倾向得分加权× | 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≠ | 1983/2003 | 1994 |
| 提出者≠ | Rosenbaum & Rubin (1983); extended to policy evaluation by Hirano, Imbens & Ridder (2003) | Card & Krueger (canonical 1994 application); Angrist & Pischke (textbook treatment) |
| 类型≠ | Quasi-experimental causal inference | Causal inference / panel regression |
| 开创性文献≠ | Hirano, K., Imbens, G. W., & Ridder, G. (2003). Efficient Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Using the Estimated Propensity Score. Econometrica, 71(4), 1161-1189. DOI ↗ | Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2009). Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion. Princeton University Press. ISBN: 978-0691120355 |
| 别名≠ | PSW policy evaluation, inverse probability weighting for policy, IPW policy evaluation, policy PSW | diff-in-diff, DiD, Farkların Farkı (Diff-in-Diff) |
| 相关≠ | 6 | 5 |
| 摘要≠ | Policy evaluation propensity score weighting applies inverse-probability weighting to observational data to estimate the causal effect of a policy program. By reweighting participants and non-participants so they resemble a target population, it removes selection bias from voluntary or administratively allocated program assignment without requiring randomization. | 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 ↗ |
|
|