arXiv Science⌕ Search

arXiv · 2610.31106

Testing for peer effects in short panels without identifying the network structure

Abstract

We propose an instrument-based test for peer effects in short-T panels when the underlying network is unknown. The test avoids estimating the network by aggregating pairwise comparisons between covariate-projected outcomes of potential peers and residualized own outcomes. The statistic is designed for fixed-T, large-N settings with individual fixed effects, heterogeneous slopes, heteroskedasticity, and serial dependence within units. We also develop a weighted extension that accounts for additive common time effects. The limiting distribution is standard Gaussian when the norm of the projected component of the outcomes is bounded away from zero, but can be nonstandard when it is local to zero. We derive a conditional Gaussian limit experiment and a feasible conditional Monte Carlo procedure to obtain uniformly valid critical values. Monte Carlo evidence shows that the conditional procedure leads to accurate size control while retaining power against latent peer-effect alternatives.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Tom Boot, Artūras Juodis. 2026-10-22. Testing for peer effects in short panels without identifying the network structure. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.31106

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

The Anatomy of Dependence in Multivariate Ordered Choice

When individuals make simultaneous decisions across multiple ordered dimensions, standard multivariate ordered choice models impose narrow bracketing, with each dimension decided as if the others did not exist. We develop a general rectangular structure model capturing broad bracketing while nesting the standard model. The framework introduces two layers of dependence, one through the threshold structure associated with decision rules and the other through the correlation of latent utilities. We provide microfoundations, prove identification, and discuss estimation. We showcase the model in applications to parental investment in children's education, cryptocurrency familiarity and expectations, and health insurance, where the latter separates moral hazard from adverse selection.

econ.EM↗

Marital Sorting, Household Inequality and Selection

Using CPS data for 1976 to 2025, we explore how wage inequality has evolved for married couples with both spouses working full time full year, and its impact on household income inequality. We also investigate how marriage sorting patterns have changed over this period. To determine the factors driving income inequality we estimate a model explaining the joint distribution of couples' wages that accounts for spouses' employment decisions. This requires a multivariate distribution regression model that incorporates a double selection rule. We find that income inequality has increased for these households and increased wage sorting has exacerbated the inequality resulting from individual wage growth. We find that positive sorting partially reflects the correlation across unobservables influencing the wages of both members of the marriage. We decompose the changes in sorting patterns over the 50-year sample into structural, composition and selection effects and find that the increase in positive sorting primarily reflects the increased skill premia for both observed and unobserved characteristics.

econ.EM↗

Evaluating A/B Testing Methodologies via Sample Splitting: Theory and Practice

We develop a theoretical framework for sample splitting in A/B testing environments, where data for each test are partitioned into two splits to measure methodological performance when the true impacts of tests are unobserved. We show that sample-split estimators are generally biased for full-sample performance but consistently estimate sample-split analogues of it. We derive their asymptotic distributions, construct valid confidence intervals, and characterize the bias-variance trade-offs underlying sample-split design choices. We validate our theoretical results through simulations and provide implementation guidance for A/B testing products seeking to evaluate new estimators and decision rules.

econ.EM↗