方法对比

	空间安慰检验	空间双重差分法
领域	因果推断	因果推断
方法族	Regression model	Regression model
起源年份	2000s–2010s	2015
提出者	Developed organically in spatial econometrics and geographic RDD literature; prominent use in Dell (2010) and related work	Delgado & Florax
类型	Falsification / robustness check	Quasi-experimental estimator
开创性文献	Buonanno, P., Montolio, D., & Vanin, P. (2009). Does Social Capital Reduce Crime? Journal of Law and Economics, 52(1), 145-170.	Delgado, M. S., & Florax, R. J. G. M. (2015). Difference-in-differences techniques for spatial data: Local autocorrelation and spatial interaction. Economics Letters, 126, 35–40.
别名	geographic placebo test, spatial falsification test, spatial robustness check, geographic spillover test	Spatial DiD, Geo-DiD, Difference-in-Differences with Spatial Autocorrelation, Mekansal Fark-içinde-Farklar
相关	4	3
摘要	A spatial placebo test is a falsification check used in geographic or spatial causal-inference studies. The analyst applies the same estimation procedure to spatial units, boundaries, or zones where no treatment effect should exist — fake borders, shifted cutoffs, or buffer areas beyond spillover range — and checks whether a spurious effect emerges. A non-significant result in the placebo region supports the credibility of the main causal estimate.	Spatial Difference-in-Differences (Spatial DiD) extends the classical DiD estimator to settings where observations are geo-referenced and outcomes may be spatially autocorrelated or subject to spillover effects. Introduced by Delgado and Florax (2015), the method augments the standard two-way fixed-effects DiD regression with a spatial lag or spatial error term, yielding unbiased treatment-effect estimates even when policy shocks propagate across geographic units. It is used by economists, regional scientists, and urban planners evaluating place-based interventions such as infrastructure investment, environmental regulations, or zoning reforms.