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

From |
Kit Baum <baum@bc.edu> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
st: re: some questions about ivreg2... |

Date |
Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:15:13 -0500 |

Francesco said

Dear users, I'm a newbie and not a great econometrician...

I'm trying to estimate a linear equation model (unbalanced panel database) where one regressor is endogenous:

* yit = x1it x2it x3it uit

yit is the dependent variable

x1it and x2it are exogenous

x3it is endogenous

uit error

By Stata, I run the following model:

use...

sort id year

tsset id year

* ivreg2 y1 x1 x2 (x3 = x4 x5 x6), first bw(2) gmm2s kernel(tru) robust

(note: x4 and x5 are suggested by economic theory)

Then, I was suggested to compute the same equation by "xtivreg2", getting very different result (and the insignificance of one instrument)!

I know that as estimation methods differ you have something of a check on whether models

are stable, efficient and so on, but I really don't understand why and how it would be better estimating the equation above by xtivreg2 (or xtvreg). Moreover:

1) what are the differences and the reason of choice between: ivreg2 (WITH gmm option) and xtivreg and xtvreg2?

2) What does concretely mean that xtvreg2 is a "wrapper" for ivreg2 (from the help of Stata)?

3) Would be incomplete an econometric analysis employing an ivreg2 estimation only?

4) For xtivreg2, the instruments for the endogenous variable could be the lagged values of the endogenous or are usually the same of a previous ivreg2?

5) More in general are there papers or articles able to explain the reason for one choice of computation or for the other? These are new methods and I'm a bit confused.

The difference between ivreg2 and xtivreg2 is the same as the difference between regress and xtreg, fe. If you have panel data and there is significant unobserved heterogeneity per panel, fixed effects can 'soak up' those unit-specific factors. If you run xtreg,fe, you get an F-test at the bottom that all the fixed effects (measured as deviations from their grand mean) are zero. If you reject that hypothesis, OLS is misspecified and you should use fixed effects.

Exactly the same logic applies to estimating the basic equation with IV: should you include fixed effects? If so, then you should use xtivreg2 rather than ivreg2, with other options the same.

xtivreg2 is a 'wrapper' for ivreg2 in that xtivreg2 does not function independently of ivreg2. xtivreg2 affords access to all of the options of ivreg2. Please see the Baum-Schaffer-Stillman working paper no. 667 (available below) for details.

Kit Baum

Kit Baum, Boston College Economics and DIW Berlin

http://ideas.repec.org/e/pba1.html

An Introduction to Modern Econometrics Using Stata:

http://www.stata-press.com/books/imeus.html

*

* 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/

- Prev by Date:
**st: filling missing rows** - Next by Date:
**st: filling missing rows** - Previous by thread:
**st: filling missing rows** - Next by thread:
**st: Cox overfitting test?** - Index(es):

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