Cited by 70Labor market dynamics and wage inequalityEmployment and Welfare StudiesRetirement, Disability, and Employment

Choosing a Control Group for Displaced Workers

Open access
Krolikowski, Pawel·2018·ILR Review

Abstract

The vast majority of studies on the earnings of displaced workers use a control group of never-displaced workers to examine the effects of initial displacement. This approach attributes earnings declines associated with all future job instability to the initial displacement event, overstating the losses relative to the average treatment effect. In this article, the author’s approach isolates the impact of an average displacement without conditioning on future displacement status in the control group. In comparisons of the standard and alternative approaches using Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) data, the estimated long-run earnings losses fall dramatically from 25% to as low as 5%.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0019793917743707

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In non-binary and/or non-staggered designs, when all groups are untreated at period one, DID_l is equivalent to the estimator obtained by redefining treatment as an indicator for ever receiving non-zero treatment and computing Callaway and Sant'Anna (2021) estimator with this binarized and staggerized treatment.

    “In non-binary and/or non-staggered designs, when all groups are untreated at period one, DID ℓ is equivalent to the estimator obtained by: 1. redefining the treatment as an indicator equal to one if group g has ever received a non-zero treatment at t , as Deryugina (2017) or Krolikowski (2018), among others, have done in their empirical analysis; 2. computing the estimator of θ es ( ℓ -1) of Calla”

    From Difference-in-Differences Estimators of Intertemporal Treatment Effects (2026) · cites this paper as Krolikowski (2018)

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 60 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Krolikowski, P.
Affiliations
Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland (US)
Corresponding author
Krolikowski, Pawel
Venue
ILR Review
Published
2017-11-20
Volume
71
Issue
5
Pages
1232-1254
ISSN
  • 0019-7939 (ISSN-L)
  • 2162-271X
OpenAlex
W2267874816
Cited by
70
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
10.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Industrial and Labor Relations Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R24 HD041028)
  • National Institute on Aging (T32 AG000221)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Labor market dynamics and wage inequality
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Employment and Welfare Studies
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Retirement, Disability, and Employment
Keywords
displaced workers, earnings losses, control group selection, job displacement, employment instability, treatment effect estimation, long-run earnings

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review