When you want to measure the causes of an intervention, there are a number of different methods. Diversity difference (DiD) and the manufacturing process (SCM) are two well-known methods, each of which I have already given a brief econometric summary (DiD, SCM). Paper by Arkhangelsky et al (2021) in WIND in brief the difference
Typically, DID methods are used when we have a large number of units involved in the process, and researchers are prepared to create “similar scenarios” which means we can fully control the selected results by calculating additional costs. units – real and real time fixed. In contrast, the SC methods, which are triggered by only one (or fewer) detected units, attempt to compensate for the lack of uniform systems by adding units to match their previous experiences.
Arkhangelsky and co-authors also argue that the answer should not be to use DiD or SCM; but instead we should use DiD and SCM through their multi-dimensional comparisons (SDiD). In the case of a binary transition in which the control sessions do not meet the inputs and the treatment sessions have a clear time before and after, the SDiD phase can be calculated as follows.
In this equation, the result is Yit, the term μ αand, b it by the way, the stability of the individual and the time of succession. The main point of interest is τ which is associated with a distinct individual identity and on time and is in the medical category. The process within the inner wounds is similar to the differences in the different perceptions. The main difference is that these differences are weighed down by two terms: ωandsdi and ltsdi it is heavy when ωandsdi controls explicit events in the results of unconventional units and those derived from transparent units with λtsdi scheduling precautionary times for the person experiencing the problem. The method is similar to the SCM comparison yet with the standard results of SCM, αand, abandoned and there is one weight, ωandscm, which are used.
The main advantage of this method is that it facilitates a better comparison of the causes because the weights make the comparison “right” while the method puts the weight on the groups that are the same according to their previous relatives in the treated units and placement. excess weight at times corresponding to treatment periods. This makes the figures more stable and contributes to the accuracy of the comparisons. The downside of this method is that the calculations are “yours” and one has to produce the results carefully, without weight. example
The whole article explains in detail how to compare unit weights, time weights and a fixed parameter. In particular, the weight of the unit ωandsdi it is calculated that the weight, the result of the control group in the pre-existing period of the episode had the same effect as that observed in the non-weight gain, the effect of pre-treatment treatment. The fixed phase seeks to compare the magnitude of the simultaneous change of units that did not appear before the time, multiplied by the magnitude generated by the theory (NtrTpost)1/4. A standard parameter is used to increase the scattering by calculating the unit weight. To measure time weights, one sets a limit on the control of the control arm and the weight of the time in the pre-treatment, adjusting the arm effect to look the same after the treatment, controlling the arm effect.