Hi All!
Tomorrow at Applied Stats<http://projects.iq.harvard.edu/applied_stats> we will be hearing from Professor Adam Glynn (Harvard Government) who will speak on "Front-Door Difference-in-Differences Estimators: The Effects of Early In-person Voting on Turnout" (joint work with Konstantin Kashin). I've put the abstract below and included links to two different papers which are related to this project.
As per usual, we will meet at 12noon in CGIS K354. Lunch will be served -- and it's going to be a taco bar!
See you tomorrow!
Tess
-----------------
Tess Wise
PhD Candidate
Harvard Department of Government
http://tesswise.com
Front-Door Difference-in-Differences Estimators: The Effects of Early In-person Voting on Turnout
Abstract
In this paper, we develop front-door difference-in-differences estimators that utilize information from post-treatment variables in addition to information from pre-treatment covariates. Even when the front-door criterion does not hold, these estimators allow the identification of causal effects by utilizing assumptions that are analogous to standard difference-in-differences assumptions. We also demonstrate that causal effects can be bounded by front-door and front-door difference-in-differences estimators under relaxed assumptions. We illustrate these points with an application to the effects of early in-person voting on turnout. Despite recent claims that early voting had a negative effect on turnout in 2008, we find evidence that early in-person voting had small positive effects on turnout in Florida in 2008 and 2012.
http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/aglynn/files/fddid_0.pdfhttp://scholar.harvard.edu/files/aglynn/files/glynnkashin-frontdoor.pdf
\
-----------------
Tess Wise
PhD Candidate
Harvard Department of Government
http://tesswise.com
Hi All!
Next Wednesday (2/26) at Applied Stats we will be hearing from the Professor Adam Glynn from the Harvard Government Department who will be presenting on "Front-Door Difference-in-Differences Estimators: The Effects of Early In-person Voting on Turnout" (joint work with Konstantin Kashin).
As per usual, the workshop is held in CGIS K354 at 12 noon and lunch will be served! Also, I've decided to break out of the mold of Greek/Thai and I've ordered a Mexican Taco bar!!!
Tess
-----------------
Tess Wise
PhD Candidate
Harvard Department of Government
http://tesswise.com
Hi All ---
Due to the weather and the lack of a speaker, Applied Stats is cancelled tomorrow.
We'll get back to our regularly scheduled programming next Wednesday, 2/26!
Tess
-----------------
Tess Wise
PhD Candidate
Harvard Department of Government
http://tesswise.com
Hi All,
Our speaker this Wednesday at Applied Stats will be James Honaker (IQSS). James will be presenting his work entitled "Sorting Algorithms for Qualitative Data to Recover Latent Dimensions with Crowdsourced Judgments." I've attached the corresponding paper for those who are interested.
As per usual, the talk will be held in CGIS K354 at 12 noon. Lunch will be served.
Hope to see you all there!
Tess
P.S. Due to a cancellation, we currently don't have a speaker for next week (2/19). If you or someone you know would like to present at Applied Stats, please shoot me an email!
-----------------
Tess Wise
PhD Candidate
Harvard Department of Government
http://tesswise.com
Hello all!
Tomorrow at Applied Stats,<http://projects.iq.harvard.edu/applied_stats> we will be hearing from Tyson Belanger (Harvard Government) who will be presenting his work entitled "Fear, Hope, and War: Positive Inducements Help Win Wars.''
As per usual, we will meet in CGIS K354 at 12 noon and lunch will be served.
Abstract:
How do states win wars against other states? We have three explanations. By selection effects, states choose more winnable wars. By warfighting, states use negative inducements so enemies fear fighting. And by peacemaking, states use positive inducements so enemies hope for settling. This article investigates peacemaking. It theorizes that states optimally produce war influence only if they efficiently combine both warfighting negative and peacemaking positive inducements. It measures positive inducements by law of war compliance, where compliance is their presence and noncompliance means their absence, so it hypothesizes that compliance improves outcomes. It tests this by estimating average compliance effects on interstate outcomes from 1899 to 1991, in four models, with multiple specifications, and over nine issue areas. It finds that compliance likely on average causes better immediate military and final political outcomes. To win, states should be prudent by selection, fierce in warfighting, and principled enough for peacemaking.
I've attached a copy of the paper and the supplemental tables.
Tess
-----------------
Tess Wise
PhD Candidate
Harvard Department of Government
http://tesswise.com
