Below are several excerpts from the $2022$ working paper,"DEPENDENT COVERAGE AND PARENTAL "JOB LOCK": EVIDENCE FROM THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT," by

Hannah Bae Katherine Meckel.

"The $[\_\_]$ method estimates causal effects by identifying treatment and control groups that are "seemingly identical." In our case, the treatment group is dependents $($and

primary beneficiaries with a dependent$)$ with a birthdate in January. The control group is dependents $($and primary beneficiaries with a dependent$)$ who are born in December

of the previous year. The identification assumption is that, absent the effects of the dependent mandate, our outcomes would evolve smoothly around the end$-$of$-$year cut$-$offs

in dependent birthdate."

$"$In this paper, we study the effect of increased coverage for adult dependents under the Affordable Care Act on parental "job lock." To do so$,$ we compare job retention

outcomes across parents who have adult dependents born in January vs$.$ December, as the former gained access to discontinuously more months of dependent coverage. We

also estimate the effects on coverage take$-$up by the adult dependents."

$"$We first show that adult dependents are more likely to take up coverage when they are eligible for more months. They also remain enrolled on their parent's plan for longer.

Additionally, we find evidence that parents are more likely to remain with their pre$-$ACA employer and remain for a longer period of time."

From this description, you can infer that the authors are using

to identify causal effects. Their findings are

the job lock theory discussed in Week $6$ lectures.

regression discontinuity design; inconsistent with

difference$-$in$-$difference; inconsistent with

regression discontinuity design; consistent with

difference$-$in$-$difference; consistent with