ScholarGate
助手

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。

稳健反事实影响评估×反事实影响评估 (CIE)×
领域因果推断因果推断
方法族Regression modelRegression model
起源年份2010s1970s–2000s
提出者European Commission evaluation community; Pellegrini, Ferrara and colleaguesHeckman, Imbens, Rubin, and the program evaluation literature
类型Robustness-validated causal evaluationCausal inference / program evaluation
开创性文献Bia, M., Flores, C. A., Flores-Lagunes, A., & Mattei, A. (2014). A Stata package for the application of semiparametric estimators of dose–response functions. Stata Journal, 14(3), 580–604. link ↗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 ↗
别名Robust CIE, Sensitivity-checked CIE, Multi-method counterfactual evaluation, Robustness-validated impact evaluationCIE, counterfactual evaluation, counterfactual policy evaluation, impact evaluation
相关55
摘要Robust Counterfactual Impact Evaluation (Robust CIE) strengthens causal impact estimates by combining multiple quasi-experimental estimators, placebo tests, and formal sensitivity analyses. Rather than relying on a single method, it cross-validates findings across approaches — such as matching, difference-in-differences, and regression discontinuity — to ensure that conclusions do not depend on any single methodological choice.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.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Robust Counterfactual Impact Evaluation · Counterfactual Impact Evaluation. 于 2026-06-19 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare