Generalizing Difference-in-Differences to Non-Canonical Settings: Identifying an Array of Estimands

Zach Shahn; Laura Hatfield

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2408.16039

Generalizing Difference-in-Differences to Non-Canonical Settings: Identifying an Array of Estimands

Zach Shahn·Laura Hatfield

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Consider a general setting in which data on an outcome is collected in two `groups' at two time periods, with certain group-periods deemed `treated' and others `untreated'. A special case is the canonical Difference-in-Differences (DiD) setting in which one group is treated only in the second period while the other is treated in neither period. Then it is well known that under a parallel trends assumption across the two groups the classic DiD formula (subtracting the average change in outcome across periods in the treated group by the average change in the outcome across periods in the untreated group) identifies the average treatment effect on the treated in the second period. But other relations between group, period, and treatment are possible. For example, the groups might be demographic (or other baseline covariate) categories with all units in both groups treated in the second period and none treated in the first, i.e. a pre-post design. Or one group might be treated in both periods while the other is treated in neither. Furthermore, other parallel trends assumptions under other treatment regimes are possible. For example, we could assume the two groups' potential outcomes would evolve in parallel under a regime of `do not switch treatment in the second period'. In fact, there is a literal array of data structures and parallel trends assumptions. The difference between the changes in outcomes of the two groups, which we dub the `group DiD' (gDiD) formula, identifies different causal estimands depending on the data structure and parallel trends assumption adopted. Here, we determine under which combinations of data structure and assumptions the gDiD formula identifies meaningful causal estimands. We also explore when parallel trends assumptions are amenable to empirical check or structural justification via Single World Intervention Graphs.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Zach Shahn, Laura Hatfield. 2025-09-12. Generalizing Difference-in-Differences to Non-Canonical Settings: Identifying an Array of Estimands. https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.16039

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Efficient and scalable clustering of survival curves

Survival analysis encompasses a broad range of methods for analyzing time-to-event data, with one key objective being the comparison of survival curves across groups. Traditional approaches for identifying clusters of survival curves often rely on computationally intensive bootstrap techniques to approximate the null hypothesis distribution. While effective, these methods impose significant computational burdens. In this work, we propose a novel approach that leverages the k-means and log-rank test to efficiently identify and cluster survival curves. Our method eliminates the need for computationally expensive resampling, significantly reducing processing time while maintaining statistical reliability. By systematically evaluating survival curves and determining optimal clusters, the proposed method ensures a practical and scalable alternative for large-scale survival data analysis. Through simulation studies, we demonstrate that our approach achieves results comparable to existing bootstrap-based clustering methods while dramatically improving computational efficiency. These findings suggest that the log-rank-based clustering procedure offers a viable and time-efficient solution for researchers working with multiple survival curves in medical and epidemiological studies.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

Bayesian Modular Inference for Copula Models with Potentially Misspecified Marginals

Copula models of multivariate data are popular because they allow separate specification of marginal distributions and the copula function. These components can be treated as inter-related modules in a modified Bayesian inference approach called ''cutting feedback'' that is robust to their misspecification. Recent work uses a two module approach, where all $d$ marginals form a single module, to robustify inference for the marginals against copula function misspecification, or vice versa. However, marginals can exhibit differing levels of misspecification, making it attractive to assign each its own module with an individual influence parameter controlling its contribution to a joint semi-modular inference (SMI) posterior. This generalizes existing two module SMI methods, which interpolate between cut and conventional posteriors using a single influence parameter. We develop a novel copula SMI method and select the influence parameters using Bayesian optimization. It provides an efficient continuous relaxation of the discrete optimization problem over $2^d$ cut/uncut configurations. We establish theoretical properties of the resulting semi-modular posterior and demonstrate the approach on simulated and real data. The real data application uses a skew-normal copula model of asymmetric dependence between equity volatility and bond yields, where robustifying copula estimation against marginal misspecification is strongly motivated.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

On Asymptotic Outlier Rejection in Bayesian Mixed Poisson Regression Models Under Extreme Target and Covariate Values

Bayesian models are defined to be fully robust against outliers if observations infinitely far from the other data do not influence the posterior. In regression models, this entails a need to consider outliers in both target and covariate values. While in linear regression these cases are interchangeable, as both lead to anomalously large residuals, this symmetry does not apply to generalized linear models. Importantly, Hamura et al. (2025, arXiv:2106.10503) presented sufficient conditions for mixed Poisson count regression models to be robust against infinitely large target values and proposed a mixed Poisson-Rescaled Beta model fulfilling these conditions. We continue from their work and study the robustness properties of mixed Poisson regression models with Gaussian latent variables in the presence of outliers in covariates. We show that in count regression the symmetry between covariate and target outliers breaks: mixed Poisson models are not robust to outlier covariates even if they were robust to target outliers. Furthermore, we show that, as a covariate gets infinitely large, the corresponding regression coefficient posterior collapses to a point-mass distribution concentrated around zero. We hence introduce a novel robustified mixed Poisson model which we denote as $x$-outlier rejective ($x$-OR) mixed Poisson, and demonstrate its theoretical and practical ability to accommodate outliers in the covariates. We investigate robustness properties of alternative ($x$-OR) mixed Poisson models in the presence of moderate outliers with simulations and a real world case study and show that the $x$-OR log-$t$ and Rescaled Beta mixed Poisson models reject both types of outliers, leading to improved inference.

stat.ME↗