IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2610.29148.html

Testing Common Causality of Covariates: Evidence from Private-Sector Ban-the-Box Policies

Author

Listed:
  • Sunny R. Karim

Abstract

When including covariates in Difference-in-Differences, researchers must consider not only which covariates to include, but also how to model them. The Common Causality of Covariates (CCC) assumption requires that covariate coefficients in the untreated potential-outcome model remain constant across regions and periods. Violations can bias DID estimators even when the relevant covariates are correctly included. I develop a CCC test based on Wald tests from an additive model that uses untreated observations in pre-treatment periods to assess whether covariate coefficients vary across regions, periods, or both. Motivated by this specification problem, I show theoretically that well-specified Integrated DID estimators are consistent, whereas overly restrictive models can introduce bias and, under conditional homoskedasticity, unnecessarily flexible models can reduce efficiency. Monte Carlo simulations show that the CCC test has good size and power. An application to private-sector Ban-the-Box policies finds variation across both regions and periods, with positive estimated effects on wages and occupational quality among employed private-sector workers.

Suggested Citation

  • Sunny R. Karim, 2026. "Testing Common Causality of Covariates: Evidence from Private-Sector Ban-the-Box Policies," Papers 2610.29148, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2610.29148
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.29148
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:2610.29148. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: https://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.