A unified test for regression discontinuity designs
回归不连续设计的统一诊断检验AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要以回归不连续因果设计的识别诊断和多重检验控制为研究对象。
回归不连续设计的统一诊断检验AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Diagnostic tests for regression discontinuity design face a size-control problem. We document a massive over-rejection of the diagnostic restriction among empirical studies in the top five economics journals. At least one diagnostic test was rejected for 19 out of 59 studies, whereas less than 5% of the collected 787 tests rejected the null hypotheses. In other words, one-third of the studies rejected at least one of their diagnostic tests, whereas their underlying identifying restrictions appear plausible. Multiple testing causes this problem because the median number of tests per study was as high as 12. The critical issue is the lack of a formal method to dismiss possibly false rejections caused by the multiple testing problem. Therefore, we offer unified tests to overcome the size-control problem. Our procedure is based on the new joint asymptotic normality of local polynomial mean and density estimates. In simulation studies, our unified tests outperformed the Bonferroni correction. We implement the procedure as an R package rdtest with two empirical examples in its vignettes.