[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

From |
"Wiji Arulampalam" <Wiji.Arulampalam@warwick.ac.uk> |

To |
<gurst1@hotmail.com>, <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |

Subject |
Re: st: Random effects probit |

Date |
Mon, 16 Sep 2002 14:46:30 +0100 |

The model I am trying to estimate is the RE probit model. I find that as soon as I include the lagged dependent variable as a regressor, the program does not move away from the initial ordinary probit estimates. This is the case even if the 'rho' is 0.4 as limdep estimates. Changing the number of quad points to 20 in stata also does not help. Limdep has no problem in locating an estimate for 'rho' with a well defined std. error! Hope someone can help me with this problem. best wiji ================================= Professor Wiji Arulampalam, Department of Economics, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK. Tel: +44 (24) 7652 3471 Sec. Tel: +44 (24) 7652 3202 Fax: +44 (24) 7652 3032 email: wiji.arulampalam@warwick.ac.uk http://www.warwick.ac.uk/Economics/arulampalam/ RES2003: http://www.warwick.ac.uk/res2003/ >>> gurst1@hotmail.com 09/16/02 02:35PM >>> "Wiji Arulampalam" <Wiji.Arulampalam@warwick.ac.uk> wrote: > >Dear Stephen, >In most of the runs I get the result that there is no unobserved >heterogeneity as the coefficient estimates are identical to ordinary probit >when I use xtprobit. xtprobit also does not give me a std error for the >rho. But I have a mle for RE probit in stata and I have just run that and >find that my results are exactly the same as Limdep's. >I wonder what is happening? I find this very interesting and I hope someone will have something more enlightening than me to say about this. I have inquired the list in the past about a similar problem but got no answer. However, the difference between your results and the one from xtprobit could simply be due to the starting value. I also think Stephen's point was a good one, I have sometimes had results without std errors but the problem went away once I changed the number of quad. points. Bellow you'll find an answer I received from Stata to a related but different question (something like "what does it mean when Stata gives me missing values for the std. error after estimating a logit with the cluster option"). Nonetheles, I would like to know what is the source of the problem since Limdep does find a better solution, although the log likelihood is not that much different. g _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Random effects probit** - Next by Date:
**st: labelling variable** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: Random effects probit** - Next by thread:
**Re: FW: st: Random effects probit** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |