Practical operation and theoretical basis of difference-in-difference regression in science of science: The comparative trial on the scientific performance of Nobel laureates versus their coauthors
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Abadie, A., & Imbens, G. W. (2006). Large sample properties of matching estimators for average treatment effects. Econometrica, 74(1), 235–267.AbadieA.ImbensG. W.2006Large sample properties of matching estimators for average treatment effectsEconometrica74123526710.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00655.xSearch in Google Scholar
Austin, P. C. (2009). Some methods of propensity-score matching had superior performance to others: results of an empirical investigation and Monte Carlo simulations. Biometrical Journal: Journal of Mathematical Methods in Biosciences, 51(1), 171–184.AustinP. C.2009Some methods of propensity-score matching had superior performance to others: results of an empirical investigation and Monte Carlo simulationsBiometrical Journal: Journal of Mathematical Methods in Biosciences51117118410.1002/bimj.20081048819197955Search in Google Scholar
Azoulay, P., Graff Zivin, J. S., & Wang, J. (2010). Superstar extinction. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(2), 549–589.AzoulayP.Graff ZivinJ. S.WangJ.2010Superstar extinctionThe Quarterly Journal of Economics125254958910.3386/w14577Search in Google Scholar
Becker, S. O., & Ichino, A. (2002). Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores. The Stata Journal, 2(4), 358–377.BeckerS. O.IchinoA.2002Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scoresThe Stata Journal2435837710.1177/1536867X0200200403Search in Google Scholar
Blackwell, M., Iacus, S., King, G., & Porro, G. (2009). cem: Coarsened exact matching in Stata. The Stata Journal, 9(4), 524–546.BlackwellM.IacusS.KingG.PorroG.2009cem: Coarsened exact matching in StataThe Stata Journal9452454610.1177/1536867X0900900402Search in Google Scholar
Borjas, G. J., & Doran, K. B. (2015). Prizes and productivity how winning the fields medal affects scientific output. Journal of human resources, 50(3), 728–758.BorjasG. J.DoranK. B.2015Prizes and productivity how winning the fields medal affects scientific outputJournal of human resources50372875810.3386/w19445Search in Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (2004). Science of science and reflexivity. Polity.BourdieuP.2004Science of science and reflexivityPolitySearch in Google Scholar
Broadus, R. N. (1987). Toward a definition of “bibliometrics”. Scientometrics, 12(5), 373–379.BroadusR. N.1987Toward a definition of “bibliometrics”Scientometrics12537337910.1007/BF02016680Search in Google Scholar
Chan, H. F., Frey, B. S., Gallus, J., & Torgler, B. (2014). Academic honors and performance. Labour Economics, 31, 188–204.ChanH. F.FreyB. S.GallusJ.TorglerB.2014Academic honors and performanceLabour Economics3118820410.1016/j.labeco.2014.05.005Search in Google Scholar
Coca-Perraillon, M. (2007). Local and global optimal propensity score matching. SAS Global Forum, https://support.sas.com/resources/papers/proceedings/proceedings/forum2007/185-2007.pdfCoca-PerraillonM.2007Local and global optimal propensity score matchingSAS Global Forumhttps://support.sas.com/resources/papers/proceedings/proceedings/forum2007/185-2007.pdfSearch in Google Scholar
Cover, T., & Hart, P. (1967). Nearest neighbor pattern classification. IEEE transactions on information theory, 13(1), 21–27.CoverT.HartP.1967Nearest neighbor pattern classificationIEEE transactions on information theory131212710.1109/TIT.1967.1053964Search in Google Scholar
Donald, S. G., & Lang, K. (2007). Inference with difference-in-differences and other panel data. The review of Economics and Statistics, 89(2), 221–233.DonaldS. G.LangK.2007Inference with difference-in-differences and other panel dataThe review of Economics and Statistics89222123310.1162/rest.89.2.221Search in Google Scholar
Fortunato, S., Bergstrom, C. T., Börner, K., Evans, J. A., Helbing, D., Milojević, S., Petersen, A. M., Radicchi, F., Sinatra, R., & Uzzi, B. (2018). Science of science. Science, 359(6379), eaao0185.FortunatoS.BergstromC. T.BörnerK.EvansJ. A.HelbingD.MilojevićS.PetersenA. M.RadicchiF.SinatraR.UzziB.2018Science of scienceScience3596379eaao018510.1126/science.aao0185594920929496846Search in Google Scholar
Garrido, M. M., Kelley, A. S., Paris, J., Roza, K., Meier, D. E., Morrison, R. S., & Aldridge, M. D. (2014). Methods for constructing and assessing propensity scores. Health services research, 49(5), 1701–1720.GarridoM. M.KelleyA. S.ParisJ.RozaK.MeierD. E.MorrisonR. S.AldridgeM. D.2014Methods for constructing and assessing propensity scoresHealth services research4951701172010.1111/1475-6773.12182421305724779867Search in Google Scholar
Heckman, J. J., LaLonde, R. J., & Smith, J. A. (1999). The economics and econometrics of active labor market programs. In Handbook of labor economics (Vol. 3, pp. 1865–2097). Elsevier.HeckmanJ. J.LaLondeR. J.SmithJ. A.1999The economics and econometrics of active labor market programsInHandbook of labor economics318652097Elsevier10.1016/S1573-4463(99)03012-6Search in Google Scholar
Hill, J., & Reiter, J. P. (2006). Interval estimation for treatment effects using propensity score matching. Statistics in medicine, 25(13), 2230–2256.HillJ.ReiterJ. P.2006Interval estimation for treatment effects using propensity score matchingStatistics in medicine25132230225610.1002/sim.227716220488Search in Google Scholar
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 102(46), 16569–16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102HirschJ. E.2005An index to quantify an individual's scientific research outputProc Natl Acad Sci U S A102461656916572https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.050765510210.1073/pnas.0507655102128383216275915Search in Google Scholar
Huang, J. M., Gates, A. J., Sinatra, R., & Barabási, A. L. (2020). Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(9), 4609–4616.HuangJ. M.GatesA. J.SinatraR.BarabásiA. L.2020Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplinesProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences11794609461610.1073/pnas.1914221117706073032071248Search in Google Scholar
Huber, M., Lechner, M., & Steinmayr, A. (2015). Radius matching on the propensity score with bias adjustment: tuning parameters and finite sample behaviour. Empirical Economics, 49(1), 1–31.HuberM.LechnerM.SteinmayrA.2015Radius matching on the propensity score with bias adjustment: tuning parameters and finite sample behaviourEmpirical Economics49113110.1007/s00181-014-0847-1Search in Google Scholar
Iacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2012). Causal inference without balance checking: Coarsened exact matching. Political analysis, 20(1), 1–24.IacusS. M.KingG.PorroG.2012Causal inference without balance checking: Coarsened exact matchingPolitical analysis20112410.1093/pan/mpr013Search in Google Scholar
Jin, C., Ma, Y. F., & Uzzi, B. (2021). Scientific prizes and the extraordinary growth of scientific topics. Nature Communications, 12(1), 1–11.JinC.MaY. F.UzziB.2021Scientific prizes and the extraordinary growth of scientific topicsNature Communications12111110.1038/s41467-021-25712-2849270134611161Search in Google Scholar
King, G., & Nielsen, R. (2019). Why propensity scores should not be used for matching. Political analysis, 27(4), 435–454.KingG.NielsenR.2019Why propensity scores should not be used for matchingPolitical analysis27443545410.1017/pan.2019.11Search in Google Scholar
King, G., Nielsen, R., Coberley, C., Pope, J. E., & Wells, A. (2011). Comparative effectiveness of matching methods for causal inference. Unpublished manuscript, Institute for Quantitative Social Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.KingG.NielsenR.CoberleyC.PopeJ. E.WellsA.2011Comparative effectiveness of matching methods for causal inferenceUnpublished manuscript,Institute for Quantitative Social Science, Harvard UniversityCambridge, MASearch in Google Scholar
Leuven, E., & Sianesi, B. (2003). PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing.LeuvenE.SianesiB.2003PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testingSearch in Google Scholar
Li, J. C., Yin, Y. A., Fortunato, S., & Wang, D. S. (2019). A dataset of publication records for Nobel laureates. Scientific data, 6(1), 1–10.LiJ. C.YinY. A.FortunatoS.WangD. S.2019A dataset of publication records for Nobel laureatesScientific data6111010.1038/s41597-019-0033-6647242731000709Search in Google Scholar
Li, W. H., Aste, T., Caccioli, F., & Livan, G. (2019). Early coauthorship with top scientists predicts success in academic careers. Nat Commun, 10(1), 5170. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-13130-4LiW. H.AsteT.CaccioliF.LivanG.2019Early coauthorship with top scientists predicts success in academic careersNat Commun1015170https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-13130-410.1038/s41467-019-13130-4685836731729362Search in Google Scholar
Liu, M. J., & Hu, X. (2022). Movers’ advantages: The effect of mobility on scientists’ productivity and collaboration. Journal of Informetrics, 16(3), 101311.LiuM. J.HuX.2022Movers’ advantages: The effect of mobility on scientists’ productivity and collaborationJournal of Informetrics16310131110.1016/j.joi.2022.101311Search in Google Scholar
Ma, Y. F., Mukherjee, S., & Uzzi, B. (2020). Mentorship and protege success in STEM fields. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 117(25), 14077–14083. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1915516117MaY. F.MukherjeeS.UzziB.2020Mentorship and protege success in STEM fieldsProc Natl Acad Sci U S A117251407714083https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.191551611710.1073/pnas.1915516117732206532522881Search in Google Scholar
Ma, Y. F., & Uzzi, B. (2018). Scientific prize network predicts who pushes the boundaries of science. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 115(50), 12608–12615. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1800485115MaY. F.UzziB.2018Scientific prize network predicts who pushes the boundaries of scienceProc Natl Acad Sci U S A115501260812615https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.180048511510.1073/pnas.1800485115629490130530666Search in Google Scholar
McCaffrey, D. F., & Bell, R. M. (2003). Bias reduction in standard errors for linear regression with multi-stage samples. Quality control and applied statistics, 48(6), 677–682.McCaffreyD. F.BellR. M.2003Bias reduction in standard errors for linear regression with multi-stage samplesQuality control and applied statistics486677682Search in Google Scholar
Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science, 159(3810), 56–63.MertonR. K.1968The Matthew effect in science: The reward and communication systems of science are consideredScience1593810566310.1126/science.159.3810.56Search in Google Scholar
Petersen, A. M. (2018). Multiscale impact of researcher mobility. Journal of The Royal Society Interface, 15(146), 20180580.PetersenA. M.2018Multiscale impact of researcher mobilityJournal of The Royal Society Interface151462018058010.1098/rsif.2018.0580617077130257927Search in Google Scholar
Petersen, A. M., Fortunato, S., Pan, R. K., Kaski, K., Penner, O., Rungi, A., Riccaboni, M., Stanley, H. E., & Pammolli, F. (2014). Reputation and impact in academic careers. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 111(43), 15316–15321. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1323111111PetersenA. M.FortunatoS.PanR. K.KaskiK.PennerO.RungiA.RiccaboniM.StanleyH. E.PammolliF.2014Reputation and impact in academic careersProc Natl Acad Sci U S A111431531615321https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.132311111110.1073/pnas.1323111111421743625288774Search in Google Scholar
Price, D. J. (1986). Little science, big science... and beyond (Vol. 480). Columbia University Press New York.PriceD. J.1986Little science, big science... and beyond480Columbia University PressNew YorkSearch in Google Scholar
Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S., & Castellano, C. (2008). Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(45), 17268–17272.RadicchiF.FortunatoS.CastellanoC.2008Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impactProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences10545172681727210.1073/pnas.0806977105258226318978030Search in Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55.RosenbaumP. R.RubinD. B.1983The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effectsBiometrika701415510.21236/ADA114514Search in Google Scholar
Roth, J., Sant’Anna, P. H., Bilinski, A., & Poe, J. (2022). What's Trending in Difference-in-Differences? A Synthesis of the Recent Econometrics Literature. arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.01194.RothJ.Sant’AnnaP. H.BilinskiA.PoeJ.2022What's Trending in Difference-in-Differences? A Synthesis of the Recent Econometrics LiteraturearXiv preprint arXiv:2201.01194.Search in Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (1977). Assignment to treatment group on the basis of a covariate. Journal of educational Statistics, 2(1), 1–26.RubinD. B.1977Assignment to treatment group on the basis of a covariateJournal of educational Statistics2112610.1017/CBO9780511810725.009Search in Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (2005). Causal inference using potential outcomes: Design, modeling, decisions. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100(469), 322–331.RubinD. B.2005Causal inference using potential outcomes: Design, modeling, decisionsJournal of the American Statistical Association10046932233110.1198/016214504000001880Search in Google Scholar
Sinatra, R., Wang, D. S., Deville, P., Song, C. M., & Barabasi, A. L. (2016). Quantifying the evolution of individual scientific impact. Science, 354(6312). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf5239SinatraR.WangD. S.DevilleP.SongC. M.BarabasiA. L.2016Quantifying the evolution of individual scientific impactScience3546312https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf523910.1126/science.aaf523927811240Search in Google Scholar
Stuart, E. A. (2010). Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Statistical science: a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 25(1), 1.StuartE. A.2010Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forwardStatistical science: a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics251110.1214/09-STS313294367020871802Search in Google Scholar
Uzzi, B., Mukherjee, S., Stringer, M., & Jones, B. (2013). Atypical combinations and scientific impact. Science, 342(6157), 468–472.UzziB.MukherjeeS.StringerM.JonesB.2013Atypical combinations and scientific impactScience342615746847210.1126/science.124047424159044Search in Google Scholar
Wang, D. S., Song, C. M., & Barabási, A. L. (2013). Quantifying long-term scientific impact. Science, 342(6154), 127–132.WangD. S.SongC. M.BarabásiA. L.2013Quantifying long-term scientific impactScience342615412713210.1126/science.123782524092745Search in Google Scholar
Wang, J. X. (2021). To use or not to use propensity score matching? Pharmaceutical Statistics, 20(1), 15–24.WangJ. X.2021To use or not to use propensity score matching?Pharmaceutical Statistics201152410.1002/pst.205132776719Search in Google Scholar
Yang, Y., Chawla, N. V., & Uzzi, B. (2019). A network's gender composition and communication pattern predict women's leadership success. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(6), 2033–2038.YangY.ChawlaN. V.UzziB.2019A network's gender composition and communication pattern predict women's leadership successProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences11662033203810.1073/pnas.1721438116636975330670641Search in Google Scholar