Dear All:
I am writing to ask for a Difference-in-Difference question.
Usually in a standard DiD setting (as in Jeff Wooldridge's online lecture notes), there is a control group (in period 1 and period 2) and treatment group (becomes treated in period 2). The assumption one needs to check is the parallel "pre-trend" in the outcome variables.
However, in the setting of policy expansion, there is a treated group and control group in period 1, and the treated group remain treated in period 2 while the control group becomes treated in period 2. My idea of evaluating a policy expansion is to use a "reversed DiD". That means, we will need to check the parallel "post-trend" assumption instead. In addition, we will have to assume that the policy does not have a "time-accumulative" effect on the outcome variables.
Does my idea sound reasonable? Is this the way how people use DiD in evaluating policy expansion or is it just my own imagination?
I look forward to hearing from you! Thank you!
Best,
Long
Related Posts with Evaluating a policy *expansion* using Difference in Difference
Combination of Heat- and Spineplot ("weighted" heat map)?Dear all I hope I can explain what I am looking for ... I want to generate a two-dimensional histogr…
Calculate Difference between Last and First Observation in Time Series DataHello Statalist members, I want to calculate the difference between the last and first observations…
icd9, invalid codesHi all, I am working with HCUP NIS files for year 2014. I run the following code: . icd9 check …
boost pluginDear members, I am trying to using generalized boost regression model for my data. But I found erro…
Match it commandHi all, I got a question to the command "matchit". Thank you first for your help. Right now, I am …
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 Response to Evaluating a policy *expansion* using Difference in Difference
Post a Comment