Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
The Trouble with Instruments: The Need for Pretreatment Balance in Shock-Based Instrumental Variable Designs
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
The Trouble with Instruments: The Need for Pretreatment Balance in Shock-Based Instrumental Variable Designs
Do you wish to request the book?
The Trouble with Instruments: The Need for Pretreatment Balance in Shock-Based Instrumental Variable Designs
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
The Trouble with Instruments: The Need for Pretreatment Balance in Shock-Based Instrumental Variable Designs
2021
Overview
Credible causal inference in accounting and finance research often comes from natural experiments. These experiments can be exploited using several shock-based research designs, including difference in differences (DID), shock-based instrumental variable (shock-IV), and regression discontinuity. We study here shock-IV designs using panel data. We identify all shock-IV papers in two broad data sets and reexamine three of the apparently
strongest
papers—Desai and Dharmapala [Desai M, Dharmapala D (2009) Corporate tax avoidance and firm value.
Rev. Econom. Statist.
91:537–546.], Duchin et al. [Duchin R, Matsusaka J, Ozbas O (2010) When are outside directors effective?
J. Financial Econom.
95:195–214.], and Iliev [Iliev P (2010) The effect of SOX Section 404: Costs, earnings quality, and stock prices.
J. Finance
65:1163–1196.]. After we enforce covariate balance and common support for treated and control firms, the instruments in all three papers are unusable—they are no longer significant in the first stage. All three papers also show nonparallel pretreatment trends on outcomes or core covariates. The problems with these papers generalize to our full sample and to other papers exploiting the same shocks as Duchin et al. A core conclusion of our reexamination is that pretreatment balance (common support, covariate balance, and parallel pretreatment trends) is necessary for credible shock-IV designs. We provide a good-practice checklist for shock-IV design with panel data, much of which also applies to DID designs.
This paper was accepted by Shiva Rajgopal, accounting.
