Does Marriage Boost Men’s Wages?: Identification of Treatment Effects in Fixed Effects Regression Models for Panel Data

2012 ◽  
Vol 107 (498) ◽  
pp. 521-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael E. Sobel
Keyword(s):  
Panel Data ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Regression Models ◽  
Treatment Effects ◽  
Fixed Effects Regression ◽  
Fixed Effects Regression Models

scholarly journals On the Use of Two-Way Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference with Panel Data

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kosuke Imai ◽  
In Song Kim
Keyword(s):  
Panel Data ◽  
Causal Inference ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Regression Models ◽  
Applied Research ◽  
Causal Effects ◽  
Difference In Differences ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Fixed Effects Regression ◽  
Time Specific

Abstract The two-way linear fixed effects regression (2FE) has become a default method for estimating causal effects from panel data. Many applied researchers use the 2FE estimator to adjust for unobserved unit-specific and time-specific confounders at the same time. Unfortunately, we demonstrate that the ability of the 2FE model to simultaneously adjust for these two types of unobserved confounders critically relies upon the assumption of linear additive effects. Another common justification for the use of the 2FE estimator is based on its equivalence to the difference-in-differences estimator under the simplest setting with two groups and two time periods. We show that this equivalence does not hold under more general settings commonly encountered in applied research. Instead, we prove that the multi-period difference-in-differences estimator is equivalent to the weighted 2FE estimator with some observations having negative weights. These analytical results imply that in contrast to the popular belief, the 2FE estimator does not represent a design-based, nonparametric estimation strategy for causal inference. Instead, its validity fundamentally rests on the modeling assumptions.

scholarly journals Asymmetric Fixed Effects Models for Panel Data

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul D Allison
Keyword(s):  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Panel Data ◽  
Opposite Direction ◽  
Difference Method ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Regression Models ◽  
Social Phenomena ◽  
Logistic Regression Models ◽  
Fixed Effects Models ◽  
The Difference

Standard fixed effects methods presume that effects of variables are symmetric: the effect of increasing a variable is the same as the effect of decreasing that variable but in the opposite direction. This is implausible for many social phenomena. York and Light (2017) showed how to estimate asymmetric models by estimating first-difference regressions in which the difference scores for the predictors are decomposed into positive and negative changes. In this paper, I show that there are several aspects of their method that need improvement. I also develop a data generating model that justifies the first-difference method but can be applied in more general settings. In particular, it can be used to construct asymmetric logistic regression models.

scholarly journals Asymmetric Fixed-effects Models for Panel Data

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 237802311982644 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul D. Allison
Keyword(s):  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Panel Data ◽  
Opposite Direction ◽  
Difference Method ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Regression Models ◽  
Social Phenomena ◽  
Logistic Regression Models ◽  
Fixed Effects Models ◽  
The Difference

Standard fixed-effects methods presume that effects of variables are symmetric: The effect of increasing a variable is the same as the effect of decreasing that variable but in the opposite direction. This is implausible for many social phenomena. York and Light showed how to estimate asymmetric models by estimating first-difference regressions in which the difference scores for the predictors are decomposed into positive and negative changes. In this article, I show that there are several aspects of their method that need improvement. I also develop a data-generating model that justifies the first-difference method but can be applied in more general settings. In particular, it can be used to construct asymmetric logistic regression models.

scholarly journals Interactions in Fixed Effects Regression Models

2020 ◽  
pp. 004912412091493
Author(s):  
Marco Giesselmann ◽  
Alexander W. Schmidt-Catran
Keyword(s):  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Time Constant ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Regression Models ◽  
Time Varying ◽  
Unit Level ◽  
Monte Carlo Experiments ◽  
Product Term ◽  
Fixed Effects Regression ◽  
Effect Heterogeneity

An interaction in a fixed effects (FE) regression is usually specified by demeaning the product term. However, algebraic transformations reveal that this strategy does not yield a within-unit estimator. Instead, the standard FE interaction estimator reflects unit-level differences of the interacted variables. This property allows interactions of a time-constant variable and a time-varying variable in FE to be estimated but may yield unwanted results if both variables vary within units. In such cases, Monte Carlo experiments confirm that the standard FE estimator of x ⋅ z is biased if x is correlated with an unobserved unit-specific moderator of z (or vice versa). A within estimator of an interaction can be obtained by first demeaning each variable and then demeaning their product. This “double-demeaned” estimator is not subject to bias caused by unobserved effect heterogeneity. It is, however, less efficient than standard FE and only works with T > 2.

scholarly journals Let’s Talk About Fixed Effects: Let’s Talk About All the Good Things and the Bad Things

2020 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 289-299
Author(s):  
Matthias Collischon ◽  
Andreas Eberl
Keyword(s):  
Panel Data ◽  
Least Squares ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Regression Models ◽  
Ordinary Least Squares

Abstract With the broader availability of panel data, fixed effects (FE) regression models are becoming increasingly important in sociology. However, in some studies the potential pitfalls of these models may be ignored, and common critiques of FE models may not always be applicable in comparison to other methods. This article provides an overview of linear FE models and their pitfalls for applied researchers. Throughout the article, we contrast FE and classical pooled ordinary least squares (OLS) models. We argue that in most cases FE models are at least as good as pooled OLS models. Therefore, we encourage scholars to use FE models if possible. Nevertheless, the limitations of FE models should be known and considered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document