Better Understanding Triple Differences Estimators

Marcelo Ortiz-Villavicencio and Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna

Papers from arXiv.org

Abstract: Triple Differences (DDD) designs are widely used in empirical work to relax parallel trends assumptions in Difference-in-Differences (DiD) settings. This paper shows that common DDD implementations -- such as taking the difference between two DiDs or applying three-way fixed effects regressions -- are generally invalid when identification requires conditioning on covariates. In staggered adoption settings, the common DiD practice of pooling all not-yet-treated units as a comparison group introduces additional bias, even when covariates are not required for identification. These insights challenge conventional empirical strategies and underscore the need for estimators tailored specifically to DDD structures. We develop regression adjustment, inverse probability weighting, and doubly robust estimators that remain valid under covariate-adjusted DDD parallel trends. For staggered designs, we show how to correctly leverage multiple comparison groups to get more informative inference. Simulations highlight substantial bias reductions and precision gains relative to standard approaches, offering a new framework for credible DDD estimation in empirical research.

Date: 2025-05
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/2505.09942 Latest version (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:arx:papers:2505.09942

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().