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。

空间反向概率加权(空间IPW)×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2010s1994
提出者Extension of Rosenbaum & Rubin (1983) IPW to spatial settings; formal treatment by Papadogeorgou et al. (2019)Card & Krueger (canonical 1994 application); Angrist & Pischke (textbook treatment)
类型Quasi-experimental / causal inferenceCausal 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Spatial IPW, Geographic IPW, Spatially-weighted IPW, SIPWdiff-in-diff, DiD, Farkların Farkı (Diff-in-Diff)
相关65
摘要Spatial Inverse Probability Weighting extends the classical IPW estimator to settings where units are geo-referenced and spatial location is a confounding dimension. By incorporating geographic coordinates or spatial proximity into the propensity score model, it reweights the observed sample so that treatment and control groups are balanced not only on measured covariates but also on spatial structure, enabling credible causal inference from spatially indexed observational data.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: Spatial Inverse Probability Weighting · Difference-in-Differences. 于 2026-06-17 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare