Abstract:Linear regressions with period and group fixed effects are widely used to estimate treatment effects. We show that they estimate weighted sums of the average treatment effects (ATE ) in each group and period, with weights that may be negative. Due to the negative weights, the linear regression coefficient may for instance be negative while all the ATEs are positive. We propose another estimator that solves this issue. In the two applications we revisit, it is significantly different from the linear regression … Show more
“… 6. de Chaisemartin and D’Haultfœuille (2018a) obtain the same result on slightly different estimands and without assuming G ⫫ T . Under this additional condition, their estimands are equal to the Wald DID and Wald TC considered here.…”
supporting
confidence: 63%
“…Theorem 2 below shows that under our previous conditions plus assumption 8, the three estimands point identify Δ. This theorem is proved for the Wald DID and Wald TC in de Chaisemartin and D’Haultfœuille (2018a) and can be proved along the same lines for the Wald CIC. 6…”
Section: Extensionsmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…Researchers then estimate treatment effects via linear regressions, including time and group fixed effects. de Chaisemartin and D’Haultfœuille (2018a) show that around 19% of all empirical articles published by the American Economic Review between 2010 and 2012 use this research design. They also show that these regressions are extensions of the Wald DID to multiple periods and groups and that they identify weighted averages of LATEs with possibly many negative weights.…”
Differences-in-differences evaluates the effect of a treatment. In its basic version, a “control group” is untreated at two dates, whereas a “treatment group” becomes fully treated at the second date. However, in many applications of this method, the treatment rate increases more only in the treatment group. In such fuzzy designs, de Chaisemartin and D’Haultfœuille (2018b, Review of Economic Studies 85: 999–1028) propose various estimands that identify local average and quantile treatment effects under different assumptions. They also propose estimands that can be used in applications with a nonbinary treatment, multiple periods, and groups and covariates. In this article, we present the command fuzzydid, which computes the various corresponding estimators. We illustrate the use of the command by revisiting Gentzkow, Shapiro, and Sinkinson (2011, American Economic Review 101: 2980–3018).
“… 6. de Chaisemartin and D’Haultfœuille (2018a) obtain the same result on slightly different estimands and without assuming G ⫫ T . Under this additional condition, their estimands are equal to the Wald DID and Wald TC considered here.…”
supporting
confidence: 63%
“…Theorem 2 below shows that under our previous conditions plus assumption 8, the three estimands point identify Δ. This theorem is proved for the Wald DID and Wald TC in de Chaisemartin and D’Haultfœuille (2018a) and can be proved along the same lines for the Wald CIC. 6…”
Section: Extensionsmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…Researchers then estimate treatment effects via linear regressions, including time and group fixed effects. de Chaisemartin and D’Haultfœuille (2018a) show that around 19% of all empirical articles published by the American Economic Review between 2010 and 2012 use this research design. They also show that these regressions are extensions of the Wald DID to multiple periods and groups and that they identify weighted averages of LATEs with possibly many negative weights.…”
Differences-in-differences evaluates the effect of a treatment. In its basic version, a “control group” is untreated at two dates, whereas a “treatment group” becomes fully treated at the second date. However, in many applications of this method, the treatment rate increases more only in the treatment group. In such fuzzy designs, de Chaisemartin and D’Haultfœuille (2018b, Review of Economic Studies 85: 999–1028) propose various estimands that identify local average and quantile treatment effects under different assumptions. They also propose estimands that can be used in applications with a nonbinary treatment, multiple periods, and groups and covariates. In this article, we present the command fuzzydid, which computes the various corresponding estimators. We illustrate the use of the command by revisiting Gentzkow, Shapiro, and Sinkinson (2011, American Economic Review 101: 2980–3018).
“…Recent research on two-way fixed-effects (TWFE) estimators, which are usually motivated as difference-in-differences with multiple time periods, has identified issues that arise in the presence of heterogeneous treatment effects across groups or time ( Callaway and Sant’Anna (Forthcoming) ; De Chaisemartin and d’Haultfoeuille (2020) ; Goodman-Bacon and Marcus (2020) ). Using the twowayfeweights Stata package detailed in De Chaisemartin and d’Haultfoeuille (2020) , we document that 44% of the naive average treatments on the treated for pollution are assigned negative weights, indicating the need to reexamine our results using an alternative estimator. We use the alternative estimators provided by Callaway and Sant’Anna (Forthcoming) ; Callaway and Sant’Anna (2020) that are most appropriate for the staggered adoption of safer-at-home policies in our sample.…”
This paper investigates the impacts of COVID-19 safer-at-home polices on collisions and pollution. We find that statewide safer-at-home policies lead to a 20% reduction in vehicular collisions and that the effect is entirely driven by less severe collisions. For pollution, we find particulate matter concentration levels approximately 1.5
μ
g/m
3
lower during the period of a safer-at-home order, representing a 25% reduction. We document a similar reduction in air pollution following the implementation of similar policies in Europe. We calculate that as of the end of June 2020, the benefits from avoided car collisions in the U.S. were approximately $16 billion while the benefits from reduced air pollution could be as high as $13 billion.
“…de Chaisemartin and D'Haultfoeuille (2020) show that with one treatment in the regression, under a parallel trends assumption TWFE regressions identify a weighted sum of the treatment effects of treated (g, t) cells, with potentially negative weights. Because of the negative weights, the treatment coefficient in such regressions may be, say, negative, even if the treatment effect is strictly positive in every (g, t) cell.…”
Linear regressions with period and group fixed effects are widely used to estimate treatment effects. We show that they estimate weighted sums of the average treatment effects (ATE ) in each group and period, with weights that may be negative. Due to the negative weights, the linear regression coefficient may for instance be negative while all the ATEs are positive. We propose another estimator that solves this issue. In the two applications we revisit, it is significantly different from the linear regression estimator. (JEL C21, C23, D72, J31, J51, L82)
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.