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。
| 空间事件研究设计× | 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≠ | 2000s–2010s | 1994 |
| 提出者≠ | Developed across applied spatial economics literature; canonical applications in Autor, Dorn & Hanson (2013) and related regional economics studies | Card & Krueger (canonical 1994 application); Angrist & Pischke (textbook treatment) |
| 类型≠ | Quasi-experimental causal inference with spatial structure | Causal inference / panel regression |
| 开创性文献≠ | Autor, D. H., Dorn, D., & Hanson, G. H. (2013). The China Syndrome: Local Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States. American Economic Review, 103(6), 2121-2168. DOI ↗ | Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2009). Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion. Princeton University Press. ISBN: 978-0691120355 |
| 别名≠ | spatial event study, geographic event study, spatial dynamic DiD, place-based event study | diff-in-diff, DiD, Farkların Farkı (Diff-in-Diff) |
| 相关 | 5 | 5 |
| 摘要≠ | Spatial event study design estimates the dynamic causal effects of a geographically concentrated shock or policy by plotting how outcomes in affected locations evolve relative to unaffected locations across time periods, while explicitly accounting for spatial spillovers and autocorrelation across geographic units. It is widely used in regional and urban economics to evaluate place-based policies, trade shocks, and local labour market interventions. | 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 ↗ |
|
|