CausalSmith · seminar slides
Forbidden Comparisons in Fixed-Effect Poisson Difference-in-Differences
We characterize when pooled fixed-effect Poisson pseudo-maximum likelihood (PPML) in staggered-adoption difference-in-differences (DiD) delivers a negative population treatment coefficient under strictly positive proportional effects.
slides for Forbidden Comparisons in Fixed-Effect Poisson Difference-in-Differences
Overview
- The object is β⋆(δ), the limiting pooled PPML treatment coordinate.
- Under heterogeneous proportional effects, β⋆(δ) is a misspecified projection.
- Its sign is governed by fitted-mean-weighted residualized treatment comparisons.
- We give an explicit four-cohort design with β⋆(δ)<0 while every treated cohort-time proportional effect is positive.
- The counterfactual-share proportional treatment-on-the-treated target (PTT) remains positive in the same population environment.
Motivation
- Staggered adoption makes a single treatment indicator tempting.
- Linear DiD taught us that pooled two-way fixed effects can compare already-treated and newly treated cohorts in hard-to-interpret ways.
- Goodman-Bacon (2021) gives the linear decomposition.
- de Chaisemartin and D'Haultfoeuille (2020) show how heterogeneous effects can receive signed weights.
- Many applied settings use multiplicative means and PPML, especially trade and count outcomes.
- We ask how the same concern appears on the PPML scale.
Running Example
- Think of a trade policy adopted by different country pairs at different dates.
- Outcomes are nonnegative flows, so applied work often uses PPML with high-dimensional fixed effects.
- The policy effect is naturally proportional: a treated cell has a multiplicative change relative to its untreated mean.
- A single pooled PPML coefficient is often read as the policy direction.
- Our results characterize the population object behind that coefficient.
Setup
- Units belong to adoption cohorts Gi, including the never-treated cohort ∞.
- Treatment is absorbing, so cohort g is treated in period t when Dgt=1.
- The untreated mean has a unit baseline and a calendar component.
- Treated outcomes follow cohort-time proportional log multipliers δgt.
- Cohort shares stay positive in the large-array limit.
- Within-cohort baseline averages converge, so the panel collapses to cohort-time cells.
Assumptions
The load-bearing structure is multiplicative untreated means, proportional treatment effects, and a full-rank collapsed fixed-effect design.
For every unit i=1,…,N and period t=1,…,T, EPN[Yit(0)]=biNexp(γt0), with the normalization γ10=0.
For every unit i=1,…,N and period t=1,…,T with Dit=1, EPN[Yit(1)]=EPN[Yit(0)]exp(δGit).
The collapsed second-moment matrix g∈C∑t=1∑Tqgtrgtrgt′ is positive definite.
Positive-effect Scope
- The sign-reversal question is asked under the strongest sign benchmark.
- Every treated cohort-time cell has a positive proportional log multiplier.
- The multicohort scope contains early, middle, late, and never-treated cohorts.
For every cohort-period cell (g,t) with Dgt=1, δgt>0.
The cohort set satisfies {2,3,4,∞}⊆C.
Projection Target
- We study the population PPML projection, evaluated at cohort-time means.
- The fitted mean μgt⋆(δ) is the PPML fit in the collapsed cohort-time table.
- The treatment coordinate β⋆(δ) is the single coefficient produced by pooling.
- The key comparison object is Wgt(δ), the fitted-mean-weighted residual of treatment after partialling out cohort and time fixed effects.
- A cell with negative Wgt(δ) acts like an already-treated comparison cell in the PPML projection.
Related Literature
- Classical DiD builds untreated counterfactual trends from repeated observations: Ashenfelter and Card (1985), Angrist and Pischke (2009), and Imbens and Wooldridge (2009).
- Modern staggered DiD clarifies heterogeneous-effect aggregation: Goodman-Bacon (2021), Callaway and Sant'Anna (2021), Sun and Abraham (2021), and Borusyak et al. (2024).
- Nonlinear DiD and functional-form work frame the multiplicative setting: Wooldridge (2023) and Roth and Sant'Anna (2023).
- PPML practice is central in multiplicative mean models: Santos Silva and Tenreyro (2006, 2011), Correia et al. (2020), and Yotov et al. (2016).
- Moreau-Kastler (2025) supplies the closest positive proportional PTT benchmark.
Main Result: Local Sign
informal · Theorem T-1 Under collapsed rank, increasing one treated-cell proportional effect moves β⋆(δ) in the sign direction of that cell's fitted-mean-weighted residualized treatment.
Let T be positive and let C be a nonempty finite cohort set. Fix cohort shares πg∈(0,1), baseline levels bˉg>0, time effects γt, and a proportional-effect array δ. Assume:
- (Rank.) The collapsed design satisfies Assumption A-5.
- (Cell.) The cohort k belongs to C, the period s∈{1,…,T}, and the cohort-period cell is treated: Dks=1.
Write Wks(δ) for the pseudo-true qgtμgt⋆(δ)-weighted FWL residual of the treatment indicator in cell (k,s), and define E(δ)=g∈C∑t=1∑Tqgtμgt⋆(δ)Wgt(δ)2. Then E(δ)>0, and the one-coordinate path x↦β⋆(δ with δks replaced by x) is differentiable at x=δks with derivative E(δ)qksBksexp(δks)Wks(δ). Consequently, ∂δks∂β⋆(δ)<0⟺Wks(δ)<0,∂δks∂β⋆(δ)=0⟺Wks(δ)=0, and ∂δks∂β⋆(δ)>0⟺Wks(δ)>0.
Intuition
- PPML fits cohort and time fixed effects first through the multiplicative mean score.
- The remaining treatment variation is the residual after that weighted fit.
- The weights are fitted means, so high-mean cells carry more curvature in the score.
- Increasing a treated-cell effect changes the pooled coefficient through that cell's residualized treatment value.
- A negative residual means a larger positive effect in that cell pushes the pooled coefficient downward.
Homogeneous Benchmark
informal · Theorem T-3 Under the untreated mean restriction, collapsed rank, and a common treated-cell log multiplier, the pooled PPML coefficient recovers that common multiplier exactly.
Fix T, a finite cohort set C, sampling laws {PN}N, potential outcomes Yit(d), positive unit baselines biN, cohort shares πg∈(0,1), positive limiting cohort baselines bˉg, untreated time components γt0, cohort-time log effects δgt, and a scalar δ0. Suppose that
- (Untreated means.) Assumption A-2 holds.
- (Collapsed rank.) Assumption A-5 holds for C and {πg}g.
- (Common treated-cell effect.) For every g∈C and every period t, if Dgt=1, then δgt=δ0.
Then β⋆(δ)=δ0, and, for every g∈C and every period t, μgt⋆(δ)=Bgtexp(Dgtδ0).
Primitive Frontier
- The derivative result is local.
- We also give a global sign diagnostic.
- Φ, the primitive sign index, is built from cohort shares, untreated means, treatment timing, and proportional multipliers.
- Under the stated multicohort positive-effect conditions, Φ has exactly the same sign as β⋆(δ).
- In the same environment, Φ<0 implies β⋆(δ)<0<PTT.
Fix a panel length T, a finite cohort support C, triangular-array sampling laws PN, potential outcomes Yit(d), deterministic cohort labels Gi, positive unit baselines biN, limiting shares πg∈(0,1), positive limiting cohort baselines bˉg, untreated time effects γt0, and log proportional effects δgt. Suppose:
- (Horizon and support.) T>0, T≥4, the never-treated cohort belongs to C, and every finite supported cohort has adoption date different from the first period.
- (Array support.) For every N and every unit i, Gi∈C.
- (Share limits.) Assumption A-1 holds for (C,Gi,πg).
- (Untreated means.) Assumption A-2 holds for (PN,Yit(d),biN,γt0).
- (Baseline limits.) Assumption A-3 holds for (C,Gi,biN,bˉg).
- (Proportional effects.) Assumption A-4 holds for (PN,Yit(d),Gi,δgt).
- (Rank.) Assumption A-5 holds for (C,πg).
- (Frontier scope.) Assumption A-6 holds for (T,C).
- (Positive effects.) Assumption A-7 holds for (C,δgt).
Define hgt=πgbˉgexp(γt0)exp(Dgtδgt),Rg=t=1∑Thgt,Ct=g∈C∑hgt, M=g∈C∑Rg,A=g∈C∑t=1∑TDgthgt,Φ=MA−g∈C∑t=1∑TDgtRgCt. Then β⋆(δ)<0⟺Φ<0,β⋆(δ)=0⟺Φ=0,0<β⋆(δ)⟺0<Φ. Moreover, the primitive tuple induced by (πg,bˉg,γt0,δgt) belongs to RT if and only if Φ<0. For every x>1 and y>1, in the four-period support {2,3,4,∞} with equal shares, unit limiting baselines, zero untreated time effects, multiplier x on treated cells other than (2,4), and multiplier y at (2,4), Φ=165x2+12x−2y−15. Also, 25(101/100)2+12(101/100)−15=40004441, and the explicit witness W4 has Φ=−3200011559. Let mgt=bˉgexp(γt0)exp(Dgtδgt),H={(g,t):g∈C, Dgt=1}. For every (g,t)∈H, Bgtobs=Bgt,τgt=exp(δgt)−1,ωgt>0. The counterfactual-share weights sum to one: (g,t)∈H∑ωgt=1. The counterfactual-share PTT satisfies PTT=∑(g,t)∈HqgtBgtobs∑(g,t)∈Hqgtmgt−1. Finally, Φ<0⟹β⋆(δ)<0<PTT.
Four-cohort Witness
informal · Theorem T-2 In the equal-share four-cohort witness with flat untreated means, every treated cell has a positive proportional effect, the largest effect is in cell (2,4), and the primitive belongs to the sign-reversal region.
The four-cohort witness W4 is constructed with cohort support C={2,3,4,∞}, equal shares πg=1/4, limiting baselines bˉg=1, untreated time component γt0=0, and proportional-effect log multipliers δgt=⎩⎨⎧log4,log(101/100),0,(g,t)=(2,4),Dgt=1 and (g,t)=(2,4),Dgt=0. Then:
- (Region membership.) The primitive W4 belongs to the sign-reversal region R4 of Definition P-5.
- (Positive effects.) Every treated supported cell has a strictly positive proportional-effect log multiplier: if g∈C, t∈{1,2,3,4}, and Dgt=1, then δgt>0.
- (Unique largest treated effect.) The treated cell (2,4) has the strictly largest proportional-effect log multiplier: if g∈C, t∈{1,2,3,4}, Dgt=1, and (g,t)=(2,4), then δgt<δ2,4.
- (Weighted FWL residuals.) At the no-effect vector, the weighted FWL residual Wgt of Definition P-4 equals 81−3−1133−3−1113−3−1−113−3, with rows g=2,3,4,∞ and columns t=1,2,3,4. In particular, W2,4=−1/8.
- (Negative late-cell derivative at zero.) Holding all other effects at zero, dxdβ⋆(δ2,4=x, δgt=0 for (g,t)=(2,4))x=0=−101.
- (Local negative derivative under positive effects.) There exists ε>0 such that, for every effect vector δ′ satisfying ∣δgt′∣<ε for all g∈C and t∈{1,2,3,4}, if δ′ has strictly positive treated effects in the sense of Assumption A-7, then dxdβ⋆(δ′ with δ2,4′ replaced by x)x=δ2,4′<0.
Proof Sketch
- Collapse the unit fixed-effect population criterion to cohort-time cells using cohort shares and within-cohort baseline limits.
- Use the PPML first-order conditions to express local coefficient changes through a weighted residualized treatment.
- The full-rank condition keeps residual treatment variation positive.
- Eliminate fixed effects from the collapsed score to obtain the primitive sign index Φ.
- In the four-cohort design, the late cell of the early-treated cohort has a negative residual and the explicit primitive index is negative.
Also in the Paper
informal · Lemma L-1 Under the stated support, share, untreated-mean, baseline-limit, proportional-effect, and rank conditions, the unit fixed-effect population coefficient equals the collapsed finite-array treatment coordinate and converges to β⋆(δ).
informal · Lemma L-2 Under collapsed rank, the limiting PPML projection is unique and satisfies the nuisance and treatment score equations.
Interpretation
- Under common proportional effects, pooled fixed-effect PPML recovers the common log multiplier.
- Under heterogeneous proportional effects, the pooled coefficient is a projection summary shaped by fixed-effect residual comparisons.
- The four-cohort witness shows a negative limiting pooled coefficient under strictly positive granular proportional effects.
- Positive-weight proportional targets aggregate the granular effects directly.
- The sign of the pooled coefficient and the sign of the proportional PTT can therefore diverge in the same primitive environment.
Takeaways
- We characterize the population coefficient targeted by pooled fixed-effect PPML in staggered-adoption multiplicative DiD.
- The sharp sign formula links local movements in β⋆(δ) to fitted-mean-weighted residualized treatment.
- The primitive frontier gives an exact global sign diagnostic through Φ.
- The four-cohort witness establishes sign reversal with equal shares, flat untreated means, and strictly positive treated-cell effects.
- The empirical message is to interpret pooled PPML coefficients as projection summaries and use granular proportional effects or positive-weight proportional aggregates for causal sign statements.