Econometric Modeling

Part of the Springer Texts in Business and Economics book series (STBE)


This chapter treats an econometric model as an experiment, or set of experiments, that are embedded within an economic model. It shows how to unpack the “experimental content” of an econometric analysis, and demonstrates how this concept and the modeling principles from the preceding chapters contribute to the development of econometric models. These ideas come to life in applications to orchestra auditions, aluminum recycling, the returns to schooling, economic development in The Gambia, fracking, and more.

Supplementary material


  1. Angrist J, Krueger A (1991) Does compulsory school attendance affect schooling and earnings? Q J Econ 106(4):979–1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Angrist J, Pischke J-S (2009) Mostly harmless econometrics: an Empiricist’s Companion. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashley R, Parmeter C (2015) Sensitivity analysis for inference in 2SLS/GMM estimation with possibly flawed instruments. Empir Econ 49(4):1153–1171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bertrand M, Duflo E, Mullainathan S (2004) How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates? Q J Econ 119(1):249–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bound J, Jaeger D, Baker R (1995) Problems with instrumental variables estimation when the correlation between the instruments and the endogeneous explanatory variable is weak. J Am Stat Assoc 90(430):443–450Google Scholar
  6. Cabral M, Cullen MR (2016) Estimating the value of public insurance using complementary private insurance. (No. w22583). National Bureau of Economic ResearchGoogle Scholar
  7. Card D, Krueger A (1994) Minimum wages and employment: a case study of the fast food industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Am Econ Rev 84(4):772–793Google Scholar
  8. Cunningham S, Lindo J, Myers C, Schlosser A (2018) How far is too far? New evidence on abortion clinic closures, access, and abortions. (No. w23366). National Bureau of Economic ResearchGoogle Scholar
  9. Dickens W (1990) Error components in grouped data: is it ever worth weighting? Rev Econ Stat 72(2):328–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Feyrer J, Mansur E, Sacerdote B (2017) Geographic dispersion of economic shocks: evidence from the fracking revolution. Am Econ Rev 107(4):1313–1334. Available as a 2015 working paperCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Goldin C, Rouse C (2000) Orchestrating impartiality: the impact of blind auditions on female musicians. Am Econ Rev 90(4):715–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gruber J, Kim J, Mayzlin D (1999) Physician fees and procedure intensity: the case of cesarean delivery. J Health Econ 18(4):473–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hamermesh D (2000) The craft of labormetrics. Ind Labor Relat Rev 53(3):363–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jaimovich D (2013) Missing links, missing markets: internal exchanges, reciprocity and external connections in the economic networks of Gambian villages. (No. 2209075). Social Science Research NetworkGoogle Scholar
  15. James A, Smith B (2017) There will be blood: crime rates in shale-rich US counties. J Environ Econ Manag 84:125–152. Available as a 2014 working paperCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Maniloff P, Mastromonaco R (2015) The local economic aspects of fracking. Manuscript, Colorado School of Mines and the University of Oregon. Working Paper.
  17. McCollum M, Upton G (2018) Local labor market shocks and residential mortgage payments: evidence from shale oil and gas booms. Resour Energy Econ 53:162–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Moulton B (1990) An illustration of a pitfall in estimating the effects of aggregate variables on micro units. Rev Econ Stat 72(2):334–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Munasib A, Rickman D (2015) Regional economic impacts of the shale gas and tight oil boom: a synthetic control analysis. Reg Sci Urban Econ 50:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Paredes D, Komarek T, Loveridge S (2015) Income and employment effects of shale gas extraction windfalls: evidence from the Marcellus region. Energy Econ 47:112–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Solon G, Haider S, Wooldridge J (2015) What are we weighting for? J Hum Resour 50(2):301–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sam Houston State UniversityHuntsvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations