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

From |
Stas Kolenikov <skolenik@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: XTREG, RE |

Date |
Sat, 25 Sep 2004 16:56:48 -0400 |

It's hard to tell. The estimate of sigma_u is usually obtained by subtracting within sum of squares from the overall sum of squares, and it is not guaranteed that the result is non-negative. Wooldridge discusses this stuff extensively in his "Cross Section and Panel Data" book. Conceptually, this may also mean that the estimate of variance is on the boundary of the admissible space [0,+infty), and testing on the boundary is a whole area. There's a little bit about it in -help j_chibar- that refers to an STB publication. The derivatives at this max do not have to be zeroes, which must be the reason Wald test is not applicable. Now, why does this arise? The first answer is that this may be due to zero (or rather small) variance of the individual effects. If you generate white noise and fit a panel model to it, in half of the cases the estimate of sigma will be positive, and half of the times it will be restricted to zero. The second answer is that there might be some specification problems with your model and/or your data. It is usually impossible to tell what exactly is wrong... except that something IS wrong. Stas On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 18:09:50 -0400, Jeannette Wicks-Lim <janetlim@econs.umass.edu> wrote: > Hi, > > I am trying to run the Hausman test to compare the estimates from XTREG, FE > to XTREG, RE. But, when I use the command "xthaus" I get the following > message: > > . xthaus > Estimate of sigma_u = 0, random-effects estimator has degenerated to pooled > OLS and the Wald test from xthausman may not be appropriate. See [R] > hausman > for a more general implementation of the Hausman test. > > Can someone explain to me why might my sigma_u = 0? Does it indicate that > there is something wrong with the way I've specified my model or that > there's something wrong with the data I'm using (not enough variation?)? > > Thanks so much, > Jeannette > > * > * 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/ > -- Stas Kolenikov http://stas.kolenikov.name * * 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/

**References**:**st: XTREG, RE***From:*Jeannette Wicks-Lim <janetlim@econs.umass.edu>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: heteroscedasticity test for probit and oprobit** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: Question about using the Hausman test after XTREG, FE and XTREG, RE** - Previous by thread:
**st: XTREG, RE** - Next by thread:
**st: will gllamm work with the multiple imputation routines published in SJ 4-3?** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2016 StataCorp LP | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |