On Event Studies and Distributed-Lags in Two-Way Fixed Effects Models: Identification, Equivalence, and Generalization

We discuss important properties and pitfalls of panel-data event study designs. We derive three main results. First, binning of effect window endpoints is a practical necessity and key for identification of dynamic treatment effects. Second, event study designs with binned endpoints and distributed-lag models are numerically identical leading to the same parameter estimates after correct reparametrization. Third, classic dummy variable event study designs can be generalized to models that account for multiple events of different sign and intensity of the treatment, which are particularly interesting for research in labor economics and public finance. We show the practical relevance of our methodological points in a replication study.

[1]  Susan Athey,et al.  Design-Based Analysis in Difference-in-Differences Settings with Staggered Adoption , 2018, Journal of Econometrics.

[2]  Andrey Fradkin,et al.  The Impact of Unemployment Insurance on Job Search: Evidence from Google Search Data , 2016, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[3]  Owen M. Zidar,et al.  Capitalists in the Twenty-First Century , 2019, The Quarterly Journal of Economics.

[4]  I. Drechsler,et al.  The Deposits Channel of Monetary Policy , 2016 .

[5]  J. Reif,et al.  Interpreting Pre-Trends as Anticipation: Impact on Estimated Treatment Effects from Tort Reform , 2015 .

[6]  Andrew Goodman-Bacon.  Public Insurance and Mortality: Evidence from Medicaid Implementation , 2017, Journal of Political Economy.

[7]  Suresh Naidu,et al.  Coups, Corporations, and Classified Information , 2008 .

[8]  C. Fuest,et al.  Do Higher Corporate Taxes Reduce Wages? Micro Evidence from Germany , 2013, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[9]  Marianne H. Wanamaker,et al.  Tuskegee and the Health of Black Men , 2016, The quarterly journal of economics.

[10]  J. Roth.  Pre-test with Caution: Event-study Estimates After Testing for Parallel Trends , 2019 .

[11]  David Simon.  Does Early Life Exposure to Cigarette Smoke Permanently Harm Childhood Welfare? Evidence from Cigarette Tax Hikes , 2016 .

[12]  Andrew Goodman-Bacon.  Difference-in-Differences with Variation in Treatment Timing , 2018, Journal of Econometrics.

[13]  Owen M. Zidar,et al.  Who Benefits from State Corporate Tax Cuts? A Local Labor Markets Approach with Heterogeneous Firms , 2014 .

[14]  Jesse M. Shapiro,et al.  Pre-Event Trends in the Panel Event-Study Design , 2018, American Economic Review.

[15]  Liyang Sun,et al.  Estimating Dynamic Treatment Effects in Event Studies With Heterogeneous Treatment Effects , 2018, Journal of Econometrics.

[16]  Joshua D. Angrist,et al.  The Credibility Revolution in Empirical Economics: How Better Research Design is Taking the Con Out of Econometrics , 2010, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[17]  Xavier Jaravel,et al.  Revisiting Event Study Designs , 2017 .

[18]  Michael B. Urbancic,et al.  Broken or Fixed Effects? , 2014 .

[19]  Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna,et al.  Difference-in-Differences with Multiple Time Periods , 2018, Journal of Econometrics.

[20]  Michael A. Clemens,et al.  Immigration Restrictions as Active Labor Market Policy: Evidence from the Mexican Bracero Exclusion , 2017, The American economic review.

[21]  Xavier D’Haultfœuille,et al.  Two-Way Fixed Effects Estimators with Heterogeneous Treatment Effects , 2019 .

[22]  A. Mackinlay,et al.  Event Studies in Economics and Finance , 1997 .