Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

rdd-analysis

Estimate effects by comparing observations just above and below an eligibility threshold using regression discontinuity design. Covers plots, comparison range selection, sharp and fuzzy designs, validity checks, and sensitivity analysis for reporting research findings.

OriginalShow the original description

Econometrics skill for Regression Discontinuity Design (RDD). Activates when the user asks about: "regression discontinuity", "RDD", "RD design", "sharp RDD", "fuzzy RDD", "running variable", "forcing variable", "cutoff", "bandwidth selection", "local linear regression", "McCrary test", "density test", "RDROBUST", "continuity assumption", "donut hole RDD", "geographic RDD", "断点回归", "回归不连续", "运行变量", "截断值", "带宽选择", "精确断点", "模糊断点", "密度检验", "局部线性回归"

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Good for

  • Estimate a policy effect near an eligibility threshold
  • Analyze treatment with imperfect compliance
  • Check manipulation and covariate balance at a cutoff
  • Compare estimates across different bandwidths

Files included (2)

  • SKILL.md7.2 KB
  • references/rdd-reference.md7.0 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Regression Discontinuity Design (RDD) Skill

This skill covers sharp and fuzzy RDD: identification assumptions, bandwidth selection, local polynomial estimation, validity tests, and reporting standards for academic papers.

Core Logic

RDD exploits a known threshold in a continuous "running variable" (X) that determines treatment assignment. Units just above and below the cutoff (c) are comparable on all dimensions except treatment.

Sharp RDD: Treatment perfectly determined by crossing cutoff

  • T_i = 1 if X_i ≥ c, T_i = 0 if X_i < c
  • Estimand: Average treatment effect at the cutoff (τ_SRD)

Fuzzy RDD: Crossing cutoff increases probability of treatment (like an instrument)

  • Use when there's non-compliance around the cutoff
  • Estimand: LATE at the cutoff (τ_FRD = reduced form / first stage)

RDD Assumptions

  1. Continuity of conditional expectation: E[Y(0)|X] and E[Y(1)|X] are continuous at X = c
    • Means: units cannot precisely manipulate running variable to select into treatment
  2. No other discontinuities: Nothing else changes discontinuously at the cutoff
  3. Bandwidth continuity: Observations near cutoff are locally valid comparisons

Complete RDD Workflow

Step 1: Visualize the Discontinuity

Always plot the raw data with binned means before any regression.

# Python
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import numpy as np

# Bin the running variable
df['bin'] = pd.cut(df['running_var'], bins=50)
bin_means = df.groupby('bin')[['running_var', 'y']].mean().reset_index()

plt.figure(figsize=(10, 6))
plt.scatter(bin_means['running_var'], bin_means['y'], s=30, color='steelblue')
plt.axvline(x=cutoff, color='red', linestyle='--', label='Cutoff')
plt.xlabel('Running Variable'); plt.ylabel('Outcome')
plt.title('RDD: Binned Scatter Plot')
plt.legend(); plt.show()
# R (rdplot from rdrobust)
library(rdrobust)
rdplot(y = df$y, x = df$running_var, c = cutoff,
       title = "RDD Binned Scatter", x.label = "Running Variable",
       y.label = "Outcome")
rdplot y running_var, c(cutoff) graph_options(title("RDD Visualization"))

Step 2: Bandwidth Selection

Default: Use Imbens-Kalyanaraman (IK) or Calonico-Cattaneo-Titiunik (CCT) optimal bandwidth.

from rdrobust import rdrobust
result = rdrobust(df['y'], df['running_var'], c=cutoff)
print(result.summary())
rdbwselect(y = df$y, x = df$running_var, c = cutoff)
rdbwselect y running_var, c(cutoff) all

Step 3: Main RDD Estimate

# Python (rdrobust) — triangular kernel, local linear
result = rdrobust(y=df['y'], x=df['running_var'], c=cutoff,
                  kernel='triangular', p=1)
print(result.summary())
# R
main_rdd <- rdrobust(y = df$y, x = df$running_var, c = cutoff,
                     kernel = "triangular", p = 1)
summary(main_rdd)
rdrobust y running_var, c(cutoff) kernel(triangular) p(1)

Step 4: Validity Tests (All Required)

4a. Density/Manipulation Test (McCrary Test)

H₀: No discontinuity in density of running variable at cutoff

from rdrobust import rddensity
density_test = rddensity(df['running_var'], c=cutoff)
print(density_test.summary())
library(rddensity)
rdd_density <- rddensity(df$running_var, c = cutoff)
summary(rdd_density)
rdplotdensity(rdd_density, df$running_var)
rddensity running_var, c(cutoff)

Interpretation: p > 0.05 → no bunching; manipulation unlikely ✓

4b. Covariate Balance (Placebo Outcome Tests)

Run RDD on pre-determined covariates — should find no discontinuity.

for (cov in c("age", "income_pre", "gender")) {
  res <- rdrobust(y = df[[cov]], x = df$running_var, c = cutoff)
  cat(cov, ": coef =", res$coef[1], ", p =", res$pv[3], "\n")
}

4c. Placebo Cutoff Tests

Run RDD at fake cutoffs above and below actual cutoff — should find no effects.

for (fake_c in c(cutoff - 5, cutoff + 5)) {
  df_sub <- df[df$running_var < cutoff, ]  # Use only control side
  res <- rdrobust(df_sub$y, df_sub$running_var, c = fake_c)
  cat("Placebo c =", fake_c, ": coef =", res$coef[1], "\n")
}

4d. Bandwidth Sensitivity

Report estimates at 50%, 75%, 125%, 150% of optimal bandwidth.

bw_opt <- rdbwselect(df$y, df$running_var, c = cutoff)$bws[1,1]
for (mult in c(0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5)) {
  res <- rdrobust(df$y, df$running_var, c = cutoff, h = bw_opt * mult)
  cat("BW =", round(bw_opt*mult,2), ": coef =", round(res$coef[1],3),
      ", p =", round(res$pv[3],3), "\n")
}

Fuzzy RDD

# R — fuzzy RDD (uses crossing as instrument for actual treatment)
fuzzy_rdd <- rdrobust(y = df$y, x = df$running_var, c = cutoff,
                      fuzzy = df$actual_treatment)
summary(fuzzy_rdd)
rdrobust y running_var, c(cutoff) fuzzy(actual_treatment)

Reporting Standards

Report in this order:

  1. Binned scatter plot showing discontinuity visually
  2. Main estimate with optimal CCT bandwidth, triangular kernel, local linear
  3. Sensitivity table: estimates across bandwidth multiples and polynomial orders
  4. Validity tests: density test (McCrary), covariate balance, placebo cutoffs
  5. Sample size: N total, N within bandwidth (left and right)

Key sentence template for papers:

"We estimate the RDD using a local linear regression with a triangular kernel and the CCT optimal bandwidth (h = [X]). The point estimate at the cutoff is [β] (SE = [se], p = [p])."

See references/rdd-reference.md for geographic RDD, kink designs, donut-hole robustness, discrete running variable RDD, and multi-cutoff/multi-score RDD.

Common Pitfalls

  • Using global polynomial regression: High-order global polynomials (e.g., 5th degree) overfit and produce misleading results — always use local linear or local quadratic
  • Not showing the binned scatter plot: The visual discontinuity is crucial for credibility — always include it
  • Ignoring manipulation: A failed McCrary test means your RDD is fundamentally compromised — address the sorting concern
  • Reporting only one bandwidth: Show sensitivity across 50%–150% of optimal bandwidth to demonstrate robustness
  • Using RDD far from cutoff: RDD estimates are valid only at the cutoff — do not extrapolate to units far from the threshold

Related Skills & Commands

  • did-analysis: If treatment doesn't have a sharp threshold, consider DID instead
  • iv-estimation: Fuzzy RDD is essentially an IV design at the cutoff
  • stats: Summarize data around the cutoff for the "Data" section
  • /diagnose: Run RDD validity tests (density, covariate balance, placebo cutoffs)
  • /robustness: Bandwidth sensitivity, polynomial order, kernel type
  • /plot: Create publication-quality RDD binned scatter plots

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

a1

FreeSummary

Turn a broad research idea into clear, testable questions. Compare familiar and less conventional approaches, structure the selected question around its population and methods, and assess variables, feasibility, and potential theoretical contributions.

  • Turn a research topic into testable questions
  • Narrow an overly broad research question
  • Compare alternative research angles
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

a2

FreeSummary

Helps build a research framework by comparing theories, mapping relationships between variables, and deriving testable hypotheses. Explores less conventional options, examines weaknesses and competing explanations, and produces diagrams with anticipated reviewer objections.

  • Comparing theories for a research question
  • Deriving hypotheses from relationships between variables
  • Examining weaknesses and anticipated reviewer objections
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

a5

FreeSummary

Clarify the philosophical assumptions behind a research project and check whether they fit the proposed methods. Get a reasoned research stance, draft proposal wording, and guidance for explaining how the researcher's background and values shape the study.

  • Clarifying philosophical foundations for a research proposal
  • Explaining why the chosen research methods fit the study
  • Drafting a statement about the researcher's position
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

academic-paper

FreeSummary

Plan and draft academic papers through specialized agent roles covering literature, arguments, citations, and review. Get chapter guidance, revision roadmaps, Traditional Chinese and English abstracts, and documents formatted as LaTeX, DOCX, PDF, or Markdown.

  • Planning a paper chapter by chapter
  • Drafting a paper from research materials
  • Turning reviewer comments into a revision roadmap
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

Turn a detailed outline into a philosophy or interdisciplinary manuscript. Draft chapters with repeated quality reviews, check terminology and arguments across sections, and prepare the manuscript, evaluation reports, abstract, and metadata for submission.

  • Draft a full paper from a detailed outline
  • Review argument and citation quality chapter by chapter
  • Check terminology and argument flow across chapters
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

Simulate academic peer review through five reviewer roles tailored to the paper's field. Receive separate critiques, an editorial decision, and a prioritized revision roadmap, or check whether a revised manuscript addresses earlier comments.

  • Review a manuscript before journal submission
  • Examine research methods and statistical validity
  • Challenge core arguments and alternative explanations
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

See all skills by brycewang-stanford

Report a problem with this skill