Identifying and disentangling direct and spillover effects using multiple pre-treatment periods

Martin Huber

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.37049

Identifying and disentangling direct and spillover effects using multiple pre-treatment periods

Martin Huber

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Under interference, the treatment of some units affects the outcomes of others, so that the effect on a treated unit consists of a direct and a spillover component. A non-treated comparison group then generally identifies neither component, but the difference between the total effect on the treated and the spillover effect on the comparison units. We show that both components are identified separately when multiple pre-treatment periods are available, without an uncontaminated comparison group. Under no anticipation, pre-treatment outcomes are free of both components for every unit. Extrapolating the pre-treatment trend within a group, as in interrupted time series approaches, therefore identifies the counterfactual outcome in the absence of any treatment. Applied to the treated it gives the total effect on them, applied to the non-treated at a given level of exposure the spillover effect on them. Disentangling the two components in addition requires effect homogeneity across treated and non-treated units with the same exposure and covariates, as well as common support in exposure. We derive doubly robust and Neyman-orthogonal expressions for the effects of interest, which permits controlling for covariates by machine learning, and establish asymptotic normality. A simulation study confirms the root-$n$ behaviour of the estimators and the reliability of the standard errors. We apply the framework to the compulsory licensing of enemy-owned patents in the United States in 1919. Licensing raised patenting in the licensed subclasses and in technologically close ones alike, so that a comparison-group design understates the total effect.

Explore related subjects

econ.EM stat.ME

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Martin Huber. 2026-10-27. Identifying and disentangling direct and spillover effects using multiple pre-treatment periods. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.37049

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Valid Post-Contextual Bandit Inference

Contextual multi-armed bandits (CMAB) are increasingly used as adaptively sampled experiments, after which researchers test hypotheses about treatment effects. We derive the Hájek-Le Cam limit experiment for multi-armed contextual bandits under equal-arms (weak-signal) asymptotics. It is Locally Asymptotically Quadratic, but not a (mixed) Gaussian shift experiment. Girsanov's theorem gives it a structural representation in stochastic differential equations. Together with a general weak convergence result, this yields the asymptotic null distribution and local asymptotic power of often-used test statistics. Two kinds of nuisance parameters threaten size control: the common reward level of the arms of interest and the rewards of the arms not of interest. The first threat is removed by translation-invariant sampling. We propose Regularized Translation-Invariant (RTI) versions of Thompson, tempered-greedy, tempered-(Lin)UCB, and exploration sampling. The second threat calls for appropriate pivots. The structural representation of the limit experiment is key to overcome the inferential challenges arising from adaptive sampling. Simulations corroborate the theory.

econ.EM↗

arXiv2026

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↗

arXiv2026

On the Use of Design-Based Simulations

Design-based simulations hold outcomes fixed and generate variation by resampling treatment assignment or shocks. They can be used in both methodological and applied work to assess inference procedures. However, their informativeness for these uses is not straightforward. We show that, when treatment effects are nonzero, these simulations can be misleading about spatial or serial correlation in clustered experiments, difference-in-differences, and shift-share designs. We analyze alternatives and formalize how these simulations can reveal features of the error distribution despite holding outcomes fixed. Finally, we consider limitations in the use of design-based simulations to select among different inference methods in applied work.

econ.EM↗