journal article Dec 11, 2021

Matching Methods for Causal Inference with Time‐Series Cross‐Sectional Data

View at Publisher Save 10.1111/ajps.12685
Abstract
AbstractMatching methods improve the validity of causal inference by reducing model dependence and offering intuitive diagnostics. Although they have become a part of the standard tool kit across disciplines, matching methods are rarely used when analysing time‐series cross‐sectional data. We fill this methodological gap. In the proposed approach, we first match each treated observation with control observations from other units in the same time period that have an identical treatment history up to the prespecified number of lags. We use standard matching and weighting methods to further refine this matched set so that the treated and matched control observations have similar covariate values. Assessing the quality of matches is done by examining covariate balance. Finally, we estimate both short‐term and long‐term average treatment effects using the difference‐in‐differences estimator, accounting for a time trend. We illustrate the proposed methodology through simulation and empirical studies. An open‐source software package is available for implementing the proposed methods.
Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References
46
[9]
Athey Susan andGuido W.Imbens.2018. “Design‐Based Analysis in Difference‐in‐differences Settings with Staggered Adoption.” Technical Report Stanford Graduate School of Business https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.05293. 10.3386/w24963
[11]
Ben‐Michael Eli AviFeller andJesseRothstein.2019a. “The Augmented Synthetic Control Method.”Technical report arXiv:1811.04170.
[12]
Ben‐Michael Eli AviFeller andJesseRothstein.2019b. “Synthetic Controls and Weighted Event Studies with Staggered Adoption.”Technical report arXiv:1912.03290.
[15]
deChaisemartin Clément andXavierD'Haultfoeuille.2018. “Two‐Way Fixed Effects Estimators with Heterogeneous Treatment Effects.” Technical report Department of Economics University of California Santa Barbara https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.08807. 10.3386/w25904
[17]
Doudchenko Nikolay andGuido W.Imbens.2017. “Balancing Regression Difference‐in‐Differences and Synthetic Control Methods: A Synthesis.” Technical report arXiv:1610.07748. 10.3386/w22791
[18]
Goodman‐Bacon Andrew.2018. “Difference‐in‐differences with Variation in Treatment Timing.” Working Paper 25018 National Bureau of Economic Research. 10.3386/w25018
[26]
Imai Kosuke andIn SongKim2011. “On the Use of Linear Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference.” Technical report Princeton University.
[34]
Nielsen Rich andJohnSheffield.2009. “Matching with Time‐series Cross‐sectional Data.” Technical report. Harvard University.http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.510.7097&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
[43]
Sun Liyang andSarahAbraham.2018. “Estimating Dynamic Treatment Effects in Event Studies with Heterogeneous Treatment Effects.” Technical report Department of Economics Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 10.2139/ssrn.3158747
Metrics
217
Citations
46
References
Details
Published
Dec 11, 2021
Vol/Issue
67(3)
Pages
587-605
License
View
Cite This Article
Kosuke Imai, In Song Kim, Erik H. Wang (2021). Matching Methods for Causal Inference with Time‐Series Cross‐Sectional Data. American Journal of Political Science, 67(3), 587-605. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12685
Related

You May Also Like

Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs

Charles S. Taber, Milton Lodge · 2006

2,785 citations

Comparative Politics and the Synthetic Control Method

Alberto Abadie, Alexis Diamond · 2014

1,832 citations

Congressional Oversight Overlooked: Police Patrols versus Fire Alarms

Mathew D. McCubbins, Thomas Schwartz · 1984

1,515 citations

A Cross-National Analysis of Economic Voting: Taking Account of the Political Context

G. Bingham Powell, Guy D. Whitten · 1993

1,283 citations