← Back to paper list

Citation Analysis

Testing for Idiosyncratic Treatment Effect Heterogeneity
Jaime Ramirez-Cuellar
https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.01141
190
Citation mentions
56
Cited references
8
Sections
7,668
Words (approx)

References by Citation Intensity

Ordered by composite index (descending). Higher values indicate more intensive citation.

# Reference Year Mentions Breadth Sec. Wtd Share Composite Main %
1 Crump, Hotz, Imbens \harvardand\ Mitnik 2008 5 3 8.0 0.026 1.000 100%
2 Ding, Feller \harvardand\ Miratrix 2019 6 3 10.0 0.032 1.000 100%
3 Koenker \harvardand\ Xiao 2002 8 5 15.0 0.042 1.000 100%
4 Ding, Feller \harvardand\ Miratrix 2016 26 8 44.5 0.137 0.987 96%
5 Henze, Klar \harvardand\ Zhu 2005 19 8 32.5 0.100 0.982 95%
6 Chernozhukov \harvardand\ Fernandez-Val 2005 14 6 24.5 0.074 0.976 93%
7 Chung \harvardand\ Olivares 2021 11 6 17.0 0.058 0.935 82%
8 Augsburg, De Haas, Harmgart \harvardand\ Meghir 2015 9 3 14.0 0.047 0.920 78%
9 Meintanis 2005 8 6 11.0 0.042 0.909 75%
10 Chen, Meintanis \harvardand\ Zhu 2019 6 6 8.0 0.032 0.874 67%
11 Cox 1984 3 3 5.0 0.016 0.843 100%
12 Rivas-Mart\'\inez, Jimenez-Gamero \harvardand\ Mor... 2019 6 5 6.5 0.032 0.794 50%
13 Sen 1984 3 2 4.0 0.016 0.737 100%
14 Berger \harvardand\ Boos 1994 3 2 5.0 0.016 0.737 100%
15 Wager \harvardand\ Athey 2018 2 2 3.0 0.011 0.644 100%
16 Heckman, Smith \harvardand\ Clements 1997 2 2 3.0 0.011 0.644 100%
17 Djebbari \harvardand\ Smith 2008 2 2 3.0 0.011 0.644 100%
18 Basu 1977 2 2 3.0 0.011 0.644 100%
19 Meintanis \harvardand\ Donatos 1996 2 2 3.0 0.011 0.644 100%
20 Hu \harvardand\ Shiu 2021 2 2 3.0 0.011 0.644 100%
21 Murota \harvardand\ Takeuchi 1981 2 2 3.0 0.011 0.644 100%
22 Bickel 1969 2 2 3.0 0.011 0.644 100%
23 Romano 1988 2 2 3.0 0.011 0.644 100%
24 Praestgaard 1995 2 2 3.0 0.011 0.644 100%
25 Abadie 2002 2 2 3.0 0.011 0.644 100%
26 Feller 2008 3 1 6.0 0.016 0.585 100%
27 Jimenez-Gamero, Alba-Fernandez, Jodra \harvardand\... 2017 2 1 4.0 0.011 0.511 100%
28 Hansen 2008 2 2 2.5 0.011 0.511 50%
29 Manski 2004 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
30 Dehejia 2005 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
31 Hirano \harvardand\ Porter 2009 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
32 Bhattacharya \harvardand\ Dupas 2012 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
33 Kitagawa \harvardand\ Tetenov 2018 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
34 Durbin 1973 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
35 Babu \harvardand\ Rao 2004 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
36 White 1980 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
37 Breusch \harvardand\ Pagan 1979 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
38 Lee \harvardand\ Shaikh 2014 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
39 Bitler, Gelbach \harvardand\ Hoynes 2017 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
40 Buhl-Wiggers, Kerwin, Munoz-Morales, Smith \harvar... 2022 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
41 Sant'Anna 2016 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
42 Goldman \harvardand\ Kaplan 2018 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
43 Feuerverger \harvardand\ Mureika 1977 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
44 Csorgo 1981 1 1 1.0 0.005 0.406 100%
45 Lancaster 2000 1 1 2.0 0.005 0.406 100%
46 Zolotarev 1981 1 1 2.0 0.005 0.406 100%
47 Lukacs 1970 1 1 2.0 0.005 0.406 100%
48 Hansen 2021 1 1 2.0 0.005 0.406 100%
49 Chen 2007 1 1 2.0 0.005 0.406 100%
50 Chen, Hong \harvardand\ Tarozzi 2008 1 1 2.0 0.005 0.406 100%
51 Oja 1987 1 1 2.0 0.005 0.406 100%
52 van der Vaart \harvardand\ Wellner 1996 4 2 2.0 0.021 0.175 0%
53 Serfling 2009 3 2 1.5 0.016 0.159 0%
54 Szekely \harvardand\ Rizzo 2005 2 2 1.0 0.011 0.139 0%
55 1 1 0.5 0.005 0.087 0%
56 1 1 0.5 0.005 0.087 0%
Measures: Mentions = total in-text citations; Breadth = distinct sections; Sec. Wtd = section-weighted count (body ×2, lit review/appendix ×0.5); Share = mentions / total citations in paper; Composite = geometric mean of normalised count, breadth, and main-text ratio; Main % = fraction of mentions in main text (excl. appendix). (self) = self-citation.

Citation intensity data generated from LaTeX source analysis.