← Back to paper list

Citation Analysis

A joint test of unconfoundedness and common trends
Martin Huber, Eva-Maria Oeß
https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.16961
77
Citation mentions
47
Cited references
10
Sections
11,922
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 Sylvain Chab\'e 2017 4 3 7.0 0.052 0.928 100%
2 Chernozhukov, Victor and Chetverikov, Denis and De... 2018 17 4 19.5 0.221 0.778 47%
3 Card, D. and Krueger, A. B. 1994 3 2 5.0 0.039 0.737 100%
4 2 2 3.0 0.026 0.644 100%
5 J Neyman 1959 2 2 3.0 0.026 0.644 100%
6 R. LaLonde 1986 2 2 3.0 0.026 0.644 100%
7 Miguel Hern\'a 2020 2 2 3.0 0.026 0.644 100%
8 Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna and Jun B. Zhao 2020 2 2 4.0 0.026 0.644 100%
9 Chang, Neng-Chieh 2020 5 2 5.5 0.065 0.644 40%
10 Xu, Yiqing 2023 1 1 1.0 0.013 0.406 100%
11 Arkhangelsky, Dmitry and Imbens, Guido 2023 1 1 1.0 0.013 0.406 100%
12 J M Robins and Andrea Rotnitzky 1995 1 1 1.0 0.013 0.406 100%
13 J. A. Hausman 1978 1 1 1.0 0.013 0.406 100%
14 J. Wooldridge 2002 1 1 1.0 0.013 0.406 100%
15 Angrist, J. D. and Pischke, J.-S. 1 1 1.0 0.013 0.406 100%
16 Peng Ding and Fan Li 2019 1 1 1.0 0.013 0.406 100%
17 Donald, Stephen G. and Hsu, Yu-Chin and Lieli, Rob... 2014 1 1 1.0 0.013 0.406 100%
18 Carolina Caetano and Brantly Callaway and Stroud P... 2022 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
19 J. Neyman 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
20 D B Rubin 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
21 D. Cox 1958 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
22 D. Rubin 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
23 Guido W. Imbens and Jeffrey M. Wooldridge 2009 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
24 Alberto Abadie 2005 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
25 M. Lechner 2011 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
26 J. Pearl 2000 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
27 Ghanem, Dalia and Sant'Anna, Pedro HC and Wu 2022 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
28 Huber, Martin (self) 2023 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
29 Robins, J M and Mark, S D and Newey, W K 1992 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
30 J. M. Robins and A. Rotnitzky and L.P. Zhao 1995 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
31 Heejung Bang, and J Robins 2005 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
32 Alexandre Belloni and Victor Chernozhukov and Chri... 2014 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
33 Martin Huber and Jannis Kueck (self) 2023 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
34 Stefan Wager and Susan Athey 2018 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
35 Farrell, Max H. and Liang, Tengyuan and Misra, San... 2021 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
36 van der Laan, M, and Polley, E and Hubbard, A 2007 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
37 Athey, S. and Imbens, G. 2016 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
38 R. H. Dehejia and S. Wahba 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
39 R. H. Dehejia and S. Wahba 2002 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
40 James J Heckman and H Ichimura and Petra Todd 1998 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
41 J. Smith and P. Todd 2005 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
42 Guido Imbens and Yiqing Xu 2024 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
43 P Z Schochet and J Burghardt and S Glazerman 2001 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
44 Carlos A. Flores and Alfonso Flores-Lagunes 2009 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
45 Carlos A. Flores and Alfonso Flores-Lagunes 2010 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
46 M. Huber (self) 2014 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
47 Schochet, Peter Z. and Burghardt, John and McConne... 2008 1 1 2.0 0.013 0.406 100%
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.