Bookmark and Share

Notice: On March 31, it was announced that Statalist is moving from an email list to a forum. The old list will shut down at the end of May, and its replacement, statalist.org is already up and running.


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

st: RE: -xthtaylor and weights


From   "Martin Weiss" <martin.weiss1@gmx.de>
To   <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>
Subject   st: RE: -xthtaylor and weights
Date   Tue, 23 Mar 2010 18:57:56 +0100

<>

" As far as I  know, the -xthtaylor command allows [iw] or [fw]."



According to its help file, this depends on the estimator used. If you go for the default, your statement is true, if you want the -amacurdy- version, it is not. The dialog boxes are usually also a good way to explore the interplay between options.



HTH
Martin

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Davillas Apostolos
Sent: Dienstag, 23. März 2010 17:50
To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject: st: -xthtaylor and weights

Dear all,

As far as I  know, the -xthtaylor command allows [iw] or [fw]. 
Applying the -xthtaylor without weights resulted to significant and
insignificant coefficients (various p-values).
However, after applying [iw], all the coefficients are strongly
significant (p-values:0.000).

Could you please give me any suggestions for this. I appreciate any help.

Thank you in advance.

Best wishes,

Apostolos  
 


    
*
*   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/


*
*   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/


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