[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]
Re: st: Juhn-Murphy-Pierce (1993)
Vora Nakavachara replied to Ben Jann:
> But should one really use the survey weights
> with the estimation? I have not seen any literature
> that mentioned anything regarding the weights in
> their Juhn-Murphy-Pierce (1993) estimation.
> Also, what about DFL?
> DiNardo-Fortin-Lemieux (1996)
> My gutts feeling says that I should be using
> the survey weights (include into the estimation
> when they do the reweighing method).
> However, I also don't see any literature
> says that they use weights in their
> DiNardo-Fortin-Lemieux (1996) estimation.
> I'm quite confuse. Can you or anyone help me with this?
I can't help you on any of this, but it is worth reminding you that it's
bad form to spray around names and years without full references when
posting to Statalist. It's the second successive post on which you've done
this! This is mentioned under section 3 (How to use Statalist: advice) in
the FAQ, thus:
"Please do not assume that the literature familiar to you is familiar to
all members of Statalist. Do not refer to publications with just minimal
details (e.g., author and date). Questions of the form "Has anyone
implemented the heteroscedasticity under a full moon test of Sue, Grabbit,
and Runne (1989)?" admittedly divide the world. Anyone who has not heard
of the said test would not be helped by the full reference to answer the
question, but they might well appreciate the full reference."
I do hope you get the answer you require. :)
CLIVE NICHOLAS |t:
Politics |e: email@example.com
Newcastle University |http://www.ncl.ac.uk/geps
Sue A, Grabbit B and Runne C (1989) "The heteroscedasticity under a full
moon test: is it really the full shilling?" J FABRICATED STAT 1(1):
* For searches and help try: