IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2205.01246.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Heterogeneous Treatment Effects for Networks, Panels, and other Outcome Matrices

Author

Listed:
  • Eric Auerbach
  • Yong Cai

Abstract

We are interested in the distribution of treatment effects for an experiment where units are randomized to a treatment but outcomes are measured for pairs of units. For example, we might measure risk sharing links between households enrolled in a microfinance program, employment relationships between workers and firms exposed to a trade shock, or bids from bidders to items assigned to an auction format. Such a double randomized experimental design may be appropriate when there are social interactions, market externalities, or other spillovers across units assigned to the same treatment. Or it may describe a natural or quasi experiment given to the researcher. In this paper, we propose a new empirical strategy that compares the eigenvalues of the outcome matrices associated with each treatment. Our proposal is based on a new matrix analog of the Fr\'echet-Hoeffding bounds that play a key role in the standard theory. We first use this result to bound the distribution of treatment effects. We then propose a new matrix analog of quantile treatment effects that is given by a difference in the eigenvalues. We call this analog spectral treatment effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric Auerbach & Yong Cai, 2022. "Heterogeneous Treatment Effects for Networks, Panels, and other Outcome Matrices," Papers 2205.01246, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2022.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2205.01246
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2205.01246
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Margherita Comola & Silvia Prina, 2021. "Treatment Effect Accounting for Network Changes," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 103(3), pages 597-604, July.
    2. Bryan S. Graham, 2008. "Identifying Social Interactions Through Conditional Variance Restrictions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(3), pages 643-660, May.
    3. Alfred Galichon, 2016. "Optimal Transport Methods in Economics," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 10870.
    4. Marianne P. Bitler & Jonah B. Gelbach & Hilary W. Hoynes, 2006. "What Mean Impacts Miss: Distributional Effects of Welfare Reform Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 988-1012, September.
    5. Bryan S. Graham & Guido W. Imbens & Geert Ridder, 2014. "Complementarity and aggregate implications of assortative matching: A nonparametric analysis," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 5, pages 29-66, March.
    6. Sergio Firpo, 2007. "Efficient Semiparametric Estimation of Quantile Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(1), pages 259-276, January.
    7. Alberto Abadie & Joshua Angrist & Guido Imbens, 2002. "Instrumental Variables Estimates of the Effect of Subsidized Training on the Quantiles of Trainee Earnings," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(1), pages 91-117, January.
    8. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey Smith & Nancy Clements, 1997. "Making The Most Out Of Programme Evaluations and Social Experiments: Accounting For Heterogeneity in Programme Impacts," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(4), pages 487-535.
    9. Patrick Bajari & Brian Burdick & Guido W. Imbens & Lorenzo Masoero & James McQueen & Thomas Richardson & Ido M. Rosen, 2021. "Multiple Randomization Designs," Papers 2112.13495, arXiv.org.
    10. Susan Athey & Jonathan Levin & Enrique Seira, 2011. "Comparing open and Sealed Bid Auctions: Evidence from Timber Auctions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(1), pages 207-257.
    11. Alfred Galichon, 2016. "Optimal transport methods in economics," Post-Print hal-03256830, HAL.
    12. Charles F. Manski, 1997. "The Mixing Problem in Programme Evaluation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(4), pages 537-553.
    13. Abhijit Banerjee & Emily Breza & Arun G. Chandrasekhar & Esther Duflo & Matthew O. Jackson & Cynthia Kinnan, 2021. "Changes in Social Network Structure in Response to Exposure to Formal Credit Markets," NBER Working Papers 28365, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    2. Eric Auerbach & Yong Cai, 2023. "Identifying Socially Disruptive Policies," Papers 2306.15000, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2023.
    3. Sakos, Grayson & Cerulli, Giovanni & Garbero, Alessandra, 2021. "Beyond the ATE: Idiosyncratic Effect Estimation to Uncover Distributional Impacts Results from 17 Impact Evaluations," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 314017, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Xavier D’Haultfoeuille & Pauline Givord, 2014. "La régression quantile en pratique," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 471(1), pages 85-111.
    5. Steven F. Lehrer & R. Vincent Pohl & Kyungchul Song, 2022. "Multiple Testing and the Distributional Effects of Accountability Incentives in Education," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 1552-1568, October.
    6. Sørensen, Kenneth Lykke, 2016. "Heterogeneous impacts on earnings from an early effort in labor market programs," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 266-279.
    7. Roger Koenker, 2017. "Quantile regression 40 years on," CeMMAP working papers 36/17, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    8. Marianne P. Bitler & Jonah B. Gelbach & Hilary W. Hoynes, 2006. "What Mean Impacts Miss: Distributional Effects of Welfare Reform Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 988-1012, September.
    9. Ozkan Eren & Serkan Ozbeklik, 2014. "Who Benefits From Job Corps? A Distributional Analysis Of An Active Labor Market Program," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 586-611, June.
    10. Philip Marx, 2020. "Sharp Bounds in the Latent Index Selection Model," Papers 2012.02390, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    11. Yanqin Fan & Sang Soo Park, 2009. "Partial identification of the distribution of treatment effects and its confidence sets," Advances in Econometrics, in: Nonparametric Econometric Methods, pages 3-70, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    12. Słoczyński, Tymon, 2012. "New Evidence on Linear Regression and Treatment Effect Heterogeneity," MPRA Paper 39524, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Marianne P. Bitler & Jonah B. Gelbach & Hilary W. Hoynes, 2006. "What Mean Impacts Miss: Distributional Effects of Welfare Reform Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 988-1012, September.
    14. Roger Koenker, 2017. "Quantile regression 40 years on," CeMMAP working papers CWP36/17, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    15. Burt S. Barnow & Jeffrey Smith, 2015. "Employment and Training Programs," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States, Volume 2, pages 127-234, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna & Xiaojun Song & Qi Xu, 2022. "Covariate distribution balance via propensity scores," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(6), pages 1093-1120, September.
    17. Victor Chernozhukov & Iván Fernández‐Val & Blaise Melly, 2013. "Inference on Counterfactual Distributions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(6), pages 2205-2268, November.
    18. Steven F. Lehrer & R. Vincent Pohl & Kyungchul Song, 2016. "Targeting Policies: Multiple Testing and Distributional Treatment Effects," NBER Working Papers 22950, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Maier, Michael, 2011. "Tests for distributional treatment effects under unconfoundedness," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 49-51, January.
    20. Havnes, Tarjei & Mogstad, Magne, 2015. "Is universal child care leveling the playing field?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 100-114.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2205.01246. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.