Notice: On March 31, it was **announced** that Statalist is moving from an email list to a **forum**. The old list will shut down on April 23, and its replacement, **statalist.org** is already up and running.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

From |
Maarten buis <maartenbuis@yahoo.co.uk> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: an estimation method question |

Date |
Wed, 17 Mar 2010 01:34:09 -0700 (PDT) |

--- On Tue, 16/3/10, Xiang Ao wrote: > There are different numbers of founders for each firm. > The smallest number is 2, it can be as many as 10 > co-founders. As far as I understand, the number of > categories need to be fixed in the methods you > mentioned. That is right, but more importantly the categories need to have the same meaning across observations. For example imangine we are looking at the proprotion of spending in a firm on labour and capital (I am no business economist so forgive me if this doesn't make substantive sense). Across firms the proportion spent on labour has (sorta) the same meaning. The aim of such an analysis is to find variables that make some firms spend more on labour and others more on capital goods. I find it harder to come up with something similar for the different founders. Who would fall in the first category, who in the second, etc. (alphabetical order?). A solution would depend on what your unit of analysis is for your study, i.e. who do you want to study: the firms or their founders. If you want to study the firms, than I could imagine that you are interested in explaining differences in the "structure" of ownership. I would than try to operationalize that in one number per firm and use an appropriate regression like command to analyse that. For example, I could imagine someone interested in the share of the largest founder as a measure of concentration of ownership, in which case I would use the -glm- trick or -betafit- (zero or one proportions are no problem there as you stated that the minimum number of founders in your dataset is 2). Alternatively, you could try other summaries of the concentration of ownership like entropy. Don't take my reference to entropy too literaly, I only know that there are many such measure, and entropy was the only one I could remember. If you want to study founders, I would for now forget about the constaint that the proportions should add up to one, and transform the data to a panel dataset where the observations are founders nested in firms. I would than try -xtgee- to model these proportions, just like the -glm- trick. It will be a population averaged model, so no individual level effects, which seems to be considered a problem in economics. However, it would be a good place to start. Hope this helps, Maarten -------------------------- Maarten L. Buis Institut fuer Soziologie Universitaet Tuebingen Wilhelmstrasse 36 72074 Tuebingen Germany http://www.maartenbuis.nl -------------------------- * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: an estimation method question***From:*Xiang Ao <xao@hbs.edu>

**References**:**Re: st: an estimation method question***From:*Xiang Ao <xao@hbs.edu>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Getting string variable values on graph** - Next by Date:
**st: xtoverid, cluster(X)** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: an estimation method question** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: an estimation method question** - Index(es):