Thanks, Mark.
> Ekaterina,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email protected]
> > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> > Ekaterina Rashkova
> > Sent: 01 August 2006 19:20
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: st: panel data and hausman test
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I am trying to decide whether to use fixed or random effects
> > model. In doing that I ran both models and then the hausman
> > test. The results fro mthe test suggest that fixed effects
> > might be superior (prob>chi sq is smaller than
> > 0.05) but does that make sense substantively?
>
> This means that the coefficients of interest are different in the two
> estimations, in a statistical sense. Since under the null (both RE and
> FE are consistent) they shouldn't be different, and under the
> alternative (only FE is consistent) they may differ, you have evidence
> that only FE is consistent.
>
> > I am studying
> > the determinants of voter turnout and my data consists of
> > 550+ observation and 77 countries.
> > Both models (FE and RE) do not provide different signs or
> > significance,
>
> You mean significance in the sense of significantly different from zero.
>
> Another way to put it is that the Hausman test suggests you should use
> your FE results, but with respect to interpreting the coefficients,
> there is no practically signficant (as opposed to statistically
> significant) difference between the RE and FE results.
>
> > but the R-sq. stat differs quite a bit (3 vs
> > 29%).
>
> You probably want to check the Stata manual on within/between/overall
> R2s.
>
> HTH.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark
>
> > Any suggestions and advice is welcome.
> > This is the hausman test output
> > :
> > hausman fixed random
> >
> > ---- Coefficients ----
> > | (b) (B) (b-B)
> > sqrt(diag(V_b-V_B))
> > | fixed random Difference S.E.
> > -------------+------------------------------------------------
> > ----------
> > -------------+------
> > stability | .8612319 .5429065 .3183254
> > .130613
> > PRHetero | 17.92476 16.23667 1.688093
> > 4.88696
> > age | -.1873375 -.1401071 -.0472304
> > .0171591
> > gdp | .0858235 .0801026 .0057209
> > .0105805
> > mandatory | 8.434539 6.504805 1.929734
> > 3.078364
> > pr | -7.481201 -6.438582 -1.042618
> > 1.307992
> > elf | -18.81114 -21.91486 3.103719
> > 10.77812
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------------
> > b = consistent under Ho and Ha;
> > obtained from xtreg
> > B = inconsistent under Ha, efficient under Ho;
> > obtained from xtreg
> >
> > Test: Ho: difference in coefficients not systematic
> >
> > chi2(7) = (b-B)'[(V_b-V_B)^(-1)](b-B)
> > = 25.94
> > Prob>chi2 = 0.0005
> >
> >
> > I appreciate your help.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ekaterina
> >
> > --
> > Ekaterina R. Rashkova
> > Graduate Student
> > Department of Political Science
> > Washington University
> > Campus Box 1063
> > One Brookings Drive
> > St. Louis, MO 63130
> > (314) 935-5856 (Fax)
> >
> > *
> > * 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/
--
Ekaterina R. Rashkova
Graduate Student
Department of Political Science
Washington University
Campus Box 1063
One Brookings Drive
St. Louis, MO 63130
(314) 935-5856 (Fax)
*
* 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/
