IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2102.06770.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Statistical Power for Estimating Treatment Effects Using Difference-in-Differences and Comparative Interrupted Time Series Designs with Variation in Treatment Timing

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Z. Schochet

Abstract

This article develops new closed-form variance expressions for power analyses for commonly used difference-in-differences (DID) and comparative interrupted time series (CITS) panel data estimators. The main contribution is to incorporate variation in treatment timing into the analysis. The power formulas also account for other key design features that arise in practice: autocorrelated errors, unequal measurement intervals, and clustering due to the unit of treatment assignment. We consider power formulas for both cross-sectional and longitudinal models and allow for covariates. An illustrative power analysis provides guidance on appropriate sample sizes. The key finding is that accounting for treatment timing increases required sample sizes. Further, DID estimators have considerably more power than standard CITS and ITS estimators. An available Shiny R dashboard performs the sample size calculations for the considered estimators.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Z. Schochet, 2021. "Statistical Power for Estimating Treatment Effects Using Difference-in-Differences and Comparative Interrupted Time Series Designs with Variation in Treatment Timing," Papers 2102.06770, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2021.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2102.06770
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2102.06770
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Katherine Baicker & Theodore Svoronos, 2019. "Testing the Validity of the Single Interrupted Time Series Design," NBER Working Papers 26080, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Peter Z. Schochet, "undated". "Is Regression Adjustment Supported by the Neyman Model for Causal Inference? (Presentation)," Mathematica Policy Research Reports abfc39d59c714499b2fe42f68, Mathematica Policy Research.
    3. Clément de Chaisemartin & Xavier D'Haultfœuille, 2020. "Two-Way Fixed Effects Estimators with Heterogeneous Treatment Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(9), pages 2964-2996, September.
    4. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra E. Todd, 1997. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(4), pages 605-654.
    5. Peter Z. Schochet, "undated". "Is Regression Adjustment Supported By the Neyman Model for Causal Inference?," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 782da2242fba458eb61752f96, Mathematica Policy Research.
    6. Ariel Linden, 2015. "Conducting interrupted time-series analysis for single- and multiple-group comparisons," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 15(2), pages 480-500, June.
    7. Alberto Abadie, 2005. "Semiparametric Difference-in-Differences Estimators," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(1), pages 1-19.
    8. Ashenfelter, Orley C, 1978. "Estimating the Effect of Training Programs on Earnings," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 60(1), pages 47-57, February.
    9. Alberto Abadie & Susan Athey & Guido W Imbens & Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2023. "When Should You Adjust Standard Errors for Clustering?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(1), pages 1-35.
    10. Burlig, Fiona & Preonas, Louis & Woerman, Matt, 2020. "Panel data and experimental design," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    11. Athey, Susan & Imbens, Guido W., 2022. "Design-based analysis in Difference-In-Differences settings with staggered adoption," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 226(1), pages 62-79.
    12. Sun, Liyang & Abraham, Sarah, 2021. "Estimating dynamic treatment effects in event studies with heterogeneous treatment effects," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 225(2), pages 175-199.
    13. Andrew Goodman-Bacon, 2018. "Difference-in-Differences with Variation in Treatment Timing," NBER Working Papers 25018, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Ashenfelter, Orley & Card, David, 1985. "Using the Longitudinal Structure of Earnings to Estimate the Effect of Training Programs," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(4), pages 648-660, November.
    15. Peter Z. Schochet, "undated". "Analyzing Grouped Administrative Data for RCTs Using Design-Based Methods," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 5453e69bbf924ecab4a24081c, Mathematica Policy Research.
    16. Callaway, Brantly & Sant’Anna, Pedro H.C., 2021. "Difference-in-Differences with multiple time periods," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 225(2), pages 200-230.
    17. McKenzie, David, 2012. "Beyond baseline and follow-up: The case for more T in experiments," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 210-221.
    18. Katherine Baicker & Theodore Svoronos, 2019. "Testing the Validity of the Single Interrupted Time Series Design," CID Working Papers 364, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    19. repec:mpr:mprres:6573 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
    21. Peter Z. Schochet, 2020. "Analyzing Grouped Administrative Data for RCTs Using Design-Based Methods," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 45(1), pages 32-57, February.
    22. repec:mpr:mprres:5863 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. A. Colin Cameron & Douglas L. Miller, 2015. "A Practitioner’s Guide to Cluster-Robust Inference," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 50(2), pages 317-372.
    24. Donald B. Rubin, 2005. "Causal Inference Using Potential Outcomes: Design, Modeling, Decisions," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 100, pages 322-331, March.
    25. Baltagi, Badi H. & Wu, Ping X., 1999. "Unequally Spaced Panel Data Regressions With Ar(1) Disturbances," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(6), pages 814-823, December.
    26. Peter Z. Schochet, "undated". "Statistical Power for Random Assignment Evaluations of Education Programs," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 6749d31ad72d4acf988f7dce5, Mathematica Policy Research.
    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. Roth, Jonathan & Sant’Anna, Pedro H.C. & Bilinski, Alyssa & Poe, John, 2023. "What’s trending in difference-in-differences? A synthesis of the recent econometrics literature," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 235(2), pages 2218-2244.
    2. Rösner, Anja & Haucap, Justus & Heimeshoff, Ulrich, 2020. "The impact of consumer protection in the digital age: Evidence from the European Union," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    3. Bruno Ferman, 2023. "Inference in difference‐in‐differences: How much should we trust in independent clusters?," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(3), pages 358-369, April.
    4. Baker, Andrew C. & Larcker, David F. & Wang, Charles C.Y., 2022. "How much should we trust staggered difference-in-differences estimates?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 370-395.
    5. Dmitry Arkhangelsky & Guido Imbens, 2023. "Causal Models for Longitudinal and Panel Data: A Survey," Papers 2311.15458, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    6. Callaway, Brantly & Sant’Anna, Pedro H.C., 2021. "Difference-in-Differences with multiple time periods," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 225(2), pages 200-230.
    7. Tamara Bischof & Boris Kaiser, 2021. "Who cares when you close down? The effects of primary care practice closures on patients," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(9), pages 2004-2025, September.
    8. Dalia Ghanem & Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna & Kaspar Wüthrich, 2022. "Selection and Parallel Trends," CESifo Working Paper Series 9910, CESifo.
    9. Ashesh Rambachan & Jonathan Roth, 2020. "Design-Based Uncertainty for Quasi-Experiments," Papers 2008.00602, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2024.
    10. Damian Clarke & Kathya Tapia-Schythe, 2021. "Implementing the panel event study," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 21(4), pages 853-884, December.
    11. Athey, Susan & Imbens, Guido W., 2022. "Design-based analysis in Difference-In-Differences settings with staggered adoption," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 226(1), pages 62-79.
    12. Schoner, Florian & Mergele, Lukas & Zierow, Larissa, 2024. "Grading student behavior," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    13. Jorge Rodríguez & Fernando Saltiel & Sergio Urzúa, 2022. "Dynamic treatment effects of job training," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(2), pages 242-269, March.
    14. Sun, Liyang & Abraham, Sarah, 2021. "Estimating dynamic treatment effects in event studies with heterogeneous treatment effects," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 225(2), pages 175-199.
    15. Pengju Zhang, 2023. "The fiscal and economic impacts of municipal dissolution: evidence from New York," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 30(4), pages 948-1001, August.
    16. de Chaisemartin, Clément & D’Haultfœuille, Xavier, 2023. "Two-way fixed effects and differences-in-differences estimators with several treatments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 236(2).
    17. Goodman-Bacon, Andrew, 2021. "Difference-in-differences with variation in treatment timing," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 225(2), pages 254-277.
    18. Kamila Cygan-Rehm, 2022. "Lifetime Consequences of Lost Instructional Time in the Classroom: Evidence from Shortened School Years," CESifo Working Paper Series 9892, CESifo.
    19. Ulbing, Philipp, 2024. "The Zero Lower Bound on Household Deposit Rates: Not As Binding As We Thought," VfS Annual Conference 2024 (Berlin): Upcoming Labor Market Challenges 302353, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    20. Yajima, Naonari & Arimura, Toshi H., 2022. "Promoting energy efficiency in Japanese manufacturing industry through energy audits: Role of information provision, disclosure, target setting, inspection, reward, and organizational structure," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).

    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:2102.06770. 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.