Hitler's Speeches and the Rise of the Nazi Party TABLE 3.Propensity score and covariate balance before and after matching,continued.Mean differences on variables reported. July 1932 November 1932 Mar 1933 Variable names Before After Impr. Before After Impr. Before After Impr. Propensity score 0.28 0.01 96 0.23 0.00 99 0.37 0.01 98 Competitiveness 1 -0.02 0.00 94 0.00 0.03 -5479 -0.01 0.00 42 Competitiveness 2 0.03 -0.02 21 0.00 0.01 -248 0.02 -0.06 -234 Organizational strength 0.54 0.04 93 0.60 0.04 93 0.93 -0.11 8 Distance to nearest airfield -0.16 -0.05 70 -0.19 0.01 6 0.32 -0.02 93 Number of eligibles 0.55 0.06 90 0.66 0.01 99 1.09 0.14 7 Previous NSDAP vote share 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 -135 -0.03 0.01 Previous appearance 0.36 -0.05 85 0.51 -0.01 98 0.49 0.14 72 Goebbels appearance 0.20 0.04 82 0.13 0.01 91 0.36 0.03 92 FIGURE 4. Difference-in-differences estimates of exposure effects on NSDAP(Hitler)vote shares, KPD(Thalmann)vote shares,and turnout in national parliamentary and presidential elections 1930-33.Lines represent 80%and 95%confidence bands.Estimates are reported for unmatched and matched samples.For full model statistics,see Tables l1 to 13 in the Appendix. 4号元 NSDAP/Hitler vote share KPD/Thalmann vote share Turnout Sep 1930 Sep 1930 (mun. Apr 1932 (P) Jul 1932 Nov 1932 fult somnte Mar 1933 matched sample 0.06-0.03 0 0.030.06 0.06 -0.03 0.03 0.06 0.06 -0.03 0.03 0.06 ESTIMATING CAMPAIGN EFFECTS: 1933 Reichstag elections.16 Figure 4 reports difference- EMPIRICAL RESULTS in-differences estimates for the five election pairs and their 80%and 95%confidence intervals.both for the The semi-parametric difference-in-differences esti- matched and unmatched samples.The calculation of mate of the effect of Hitler appearances is the mean confidence intervals is based on robust standard er- difference in the overtime changes of outcomes be- rors to account for the clustering of temporal observa- tween the matched exposure and control units,with tions(pre-and post-exposure)within areal units.Re- each unit weighted according to the size of its electoral population.Difference-in-differences estimation criti- sults for three outcomes are reported:NSDAP(Hitler) cally rests on the assumption that observed overtime vote shares,KPD(Thalmann)vote shares,and turnout. Most point estimates are in the range of +1%of the changes in the control group reflect,on average,unob- voting-eligible population,and hardly any coefficient is served changes in the exposure group in the absence significantly different from zero at conventional prob- of treatment.A common plausibility check of such parallel trends is to compare pretreatment changes ability levels.The strongest effect of-2.4%pertains to over time between exposure and control units.Fig- ure I1 in the Appendix does not indicate any differ- 16 Analogous tests are not available for the 1930 Reichstag and the 1932 presidential election since the NSDAP (Hitler)did not run in ences in pre-treatment developments for the 1932 and the reference elections of 1924 and 1925. 1059Hitler’s Speeches and the Rise of the Nazi Party TABLE 3. Propensity score and covariate balance before and after matching, continued. Mean differences on variables reported. July 1932 November 1932 Mar 1933 Variable names Before After % Impr. Before After % Impr. Before After % Impr. Propensity score 0.28 0.01 96 0.23 0.00 99 0.37 0.01 98 Competitiveness 1 –0.02 0.00 94 0.00 0.03 –5479 –0.01 0.00 42 Competitiveness 2 0.03 –0.02 21 0.00 0.01 –248 0.02 –0.06 –234 Organizational strength 0.54 0.04 93 0.60 0.04 93 0.93 –0.11 88 Distance to nearest airfield –0.16 –0.05 70 –0.19 –0.01 96 –0.32 –0.02 93 Number of eligibles 0.55 0.06 90 0.66 0.01 99 1.09 –0.14 87 Previous NSDAP vote share 0.00 0.00 92 0.00 0.01 –135 –0.03 0.01 76 Previous appearance 0.36 –0.05 85 0.51 –0.01 98 0.49 0.14 72 Goebbels appearance 0.20 0.04 82 0.13 0.01 91 0.36 0.03 92 FIGURE 4. Difference-in-differences estimates of exposure effects on NSDAP (Hitler) vote shares, KPD (Thälmann) vote shares, and turnout in national parliamentary and presidential elections 1930–33. Lines represent 80% and 95% confidence bands. Estimates are reported for unmatched and matched samples. For full model statistics, see Tables I1 to I3 in the Appendix. ESTIMATING CAMPAIGN EFFECTS: EMPIRICAL RESULTS The semi-parametric difference-in-differences esti￾mate of the effect of Hitler appearances is the mean difference in the overtime changes of outcomes be￾tween the matched exposure and control units, with each unit weighted according to the size of its electoral population. Difference-in-differences estimation criti￾cally rests on the assumption that observed overtime changes in the control group reflect, on average, unob￾served changes in the exposure group in the absence of treatment. A common plausibility check of such parallel trends is to compare pretreatment changes over time between exposure and control units. Fig￾ure I1 in the Appendix does not indicate any differ￾ences in pre-treatment developments for the 1932 and 1933 Reichstag elections.16 Figure 4 reports difference￾in-differences estimates for the five election pairs and their 80% and 95% confidence intervals, both for the matched and unmatched samples. The calculation of confidence intervals is based on robust standard er￾rors to account for the clustering of temporal observa￾tions (pre- and post-exposure) within areal units. Re￾sults for three outcomes are reported: NSDAP (Hitler) vote shares, KPD (Thälmann) vote shares, and turnout. Most point estimates are in the range of ±1% of the voting-eligible population, and hardly any coefficient is significantly different from zero at conventional prob￾ability levels. The strongest effect of −2.4% pertains to 16 Analogous tests are not available for the 1930 Reichstag and the 1932 presidential election since the NSDAP (Hitler) did not run in the reference elections of 1924 and 1925. 1059 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Shanghai JiaoTong University, on 26 Oct 2018 at 03:56:49, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055418000424