# Re: st: 9999, matching data, fixed effect probit etc...

 From "Le Wang" To statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Subject Re: st: 9999, matching data, fixed effect probit etc... Date Sat, 25 Nov 2006 01:26:35 -0600

```My thoughts on the questions.

(1a) IPUMS-USA creates some routines that construct the family
interrelationship variables. You can check it out.

http://usa.ipums.org/usa/chapter5/chapter5.shtml

(1b) I think your expectation that husband and wife will give the same
answer is wrong. They are not necessarily the first partner for each
other.

(3) I guess that you have three variables: var2, sex, year of birth.
If so, I think you should calculate mean of each category by female
and year of birth, which will be more meaningful.

Hope it helps.
Le

On 11/24/06, Nick Cox <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk> wrote:
```
```Nirina F. had problems sending this to the list.
I edited slightly using the -cmdname- convention.

Nick
n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk

-----Original Message-----

I have a few questions:

1- How do I create husband and wife variable in my data where
I have data on marital status, line number of respondent in
the household, the sex, etc..

Then  when I have identified the husband and wife, how do I test
whether they gave the same answer on the question of number of
kids they have. This is basically to test whether there was mistake in the data.

2- var2 is categorical having 4 answers,sex, year of birth.
Plot var2 on y axis, and year of birth on x axis but only for
female. I tried -tw histogram- but it doesn't give the graph
I would like to get.

3- I have the following:
year of birth: 4 digits
year of current marriage with 4 digit years but when respondent
don't know or for other reasons, they can respond to 9999
so now, if I would like to calculate age at marriage, I get
for example 8069 (9999-1930)  for people having responded 9999
for the question year of current marriage.

Could you suggest me please how I can transform this into
meaningful values or anything else?

4- does anyone know how to do -probit- with fixed effect? it seems
that the estimates will be inconsistent so has anyone found a
way of getting away from the incidental parameter problem?

Thank you very much in advance.

*
*   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/

```
```
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Le Wang, Ph.D.
Minnesota Population Center
University of Minnesota
(o) 612-624-5818
*
*   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/
```