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。

教育研究中因果关系的敏感性分析×双重差分法 (Diff-in-Diff)×
领域因果推断计量经济学
方法族Regression modelRegression model
起源年份1983–20021994
提出者Paul R. Rosenbaum (formal framework); applied in education research by Briggs and othersCard & Krueger (canonical 1994 application); Angrist & Pischke (textbook treatment)
类型Causal robustness / bias assessmentCausal inference / panel regression
开创性文献Rosenbaum, P. R. (2002). Observational Studies (2nd ed.). Springer. ISBN: 978-0387989679Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2009). Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion. Princeton University Press. ISBN: 978-0691120355
别名Rosenbaum sensitivity analysis, hidden-bias sensitivity analysis, causal sensitivity analysis, SA for causal education studiesdiff-in-diff, DiD, Farkların Farkı (Diff-in-Diff)
相关65
摘要Sensitivity analysis for causality in education research tests how robust a quasi-experimental finding is to unmeasured confounding. Rather than assuming all bias has been removed, it quantifies how large a hidden bias would need to be to overturn a causal conclusion — a critical safeguard when randomisation is impossible, which is common in educational settings.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
  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: Sensitivity analysis for causality in education research · Difference-in-Differences. 于 2026-06-18 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare