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 |
Nils Braakmann <nilsbraakmann@googlemail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: taking out the correct year-fixed-effects. |

Date |
Fri, 3 Dec 2010 06:07:00 +0000 |

Andreas, are you trying to produce something similar to figure 1 and 2 in Andrew E. Clark, Ed Diener, Yannis Georgellis and Richard E. Lucas (2008), lags and leads in life satisfaction: A test of the baseline hypothesis, Economic Journal 118, pp. F222-F243? If so, you might want to look at their specification. Additionally, the easiest way to get everything in 2004 $ would be to simply deflate the income variables using the appropriate price index before running the regressions. Cheers, Nils On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:06 PM, andreas nordset <andreas.nordset@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Listers, > > I have a balanced panel of households from 1995 to 2007. > > They are all hit by an unemployment shock in either of the years 1999-2003. > Hence I can observe ALL households as early as 4 years prior to and 4 > years after the shock. > > I run the regression > > -reg income relative-year-dummies calendar-year-dummies- > > ,where i leave out the calendar year dummy for 2004, to make that as a > "base year". > When i then plot the Constant+ relative year dummies in a diagram from > relative year -4 to +4 where Year-Fixed effects are washed out , I can > roughly state that "Income values are in 2004-$". > > Maarten simplified this work significantly by suggesting to run something like: > > -reg income relative-year-dummies calendar-year-dummies- > -adjust calendar-year-dummies, by(relative_year)- > > This gives me a nice table with correct values for each of the > relative years. However, this procedure gives the plot a different > level. So I can no longer state that values are in the value of some > base year. Does anyone know a way to set it up so I can again > interpret the values to be of 2004-units ( or any other year). > > > Thanks a lot for the help, > > Andreas > * > * 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/

**References**:**st: taking out the correct year-fixed-effects.***From:*andreas nordset <andreas.nordset@gmail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Creating automatic log file when I start Stata in MAC** - Next by Date:
**st: RE: nested calculations** - Previous by thread:
**st: taking out the correct year-fixed-effects.** - Next by thread:
**st: standard errors for conditional predicted probabilities after biprobit** - Index(es):