Statalist The Stata Listserver


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

Re: st: Juhn-Murphy-Pierce (1993)


From   "Ben Jann" <ben.jann@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: Juhn-Murphy-Pierce (1993)
Date   Wed, 29 Nov 2006 13:48:44 +0100

Since both procedures are rather descriptive, I'd say it is important
to apply the weights.

By the way, Clive:

   Juhn, Chinhui, Kevin M. Murphy, Brooks Pierce (1993). Wage
       Inequality and the Rise in Returns to Skill. Journal of
       Political Economy 101(3): 410-442.

   DiNardo, J., N.M. Fortin, and T.Lemieux (1996) "Labour Market
       Insitutions and the Distribution of Wages, 1973-1992: A
       Semiparametric Approach," Econometrica, 64(5): 1001-1044.

see help jmpierce and help dfl.


On 11/29/06, Vora Nakavachara <nakavach@usc.edu> wrote:
Thank you Ben.

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?

Sincerely,
Vora N
*
*   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/



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