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 on April 23, and its replacement, is already up and running.

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

Re: st: Marginal Effects after Biprobit with Reliable Standard Errors?

From   Austin Nichols <>
Subject   Re: st: Marginal Effects after Biprobit with Reliable Standard Errors?
Date   Tue, 1 Jun 2010 15:29:23 -0400

Claudia Berg <>
See for starters:

On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Claudia Berg <> wrote:
> Dear Statalist,
> I am trying to obtain marginal effects with reliable standard errors after a
> Seemingly Unrelated Biprobit model.  I have tried using the commands "mfx
> compute, predict()" but Stata warns that it is "unsuitable" for biprobit and
> imposes the option "nose".  I know that the option "force" can be used to
> obtain standard errors but with no guarrantee that they are reliable.  I
> have refered to the earlier discussion on statalist found at
> which says that: "if
> diag(vce) shows a large relative difference (say, bigger than 10^-2 for
> example) the standard errors given by using force will probably be
> wrong..."  I checked the "diagnose(vce)" option for my data and found that
> for my data the relative difference was about 0.029.
> Can anyone suggest a way to get reliable standard errors?  If I am forced to
> use "force", how unreliable would the standard errors be?
> Thank you in advance for any and all advice and comments!

*   For searches and help try:

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