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]

From |
Charles Koss <hqtiger@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: Explaining apparent inconsistency in regression coefficients |

Date |
Fri, 8 Apr 2011 14:47:11 -0500 |

Since y1 and y2 can be zero and y3 can't since is the sum of y1 and y2, then, 0.21 seems a resonable estimate given 0.45 and 0.35 (y1 ^ y2) as the slopes for variables that allow for zero values, they tend to be higher in magnitue, i.e. they are steeper. In contrast, since y3 can not be zero, the coeficient is lower, causing lower change, a flater curve in 2D. Cheers, Charles -- Charles Koss http://charlesonnet.blogspot.com On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Hussain Samad <hsamad2000@yahoo.com> wrote: > Dear Statalist: > > This is not exactly a STATA question except for the program is run in STATA. I > am running a say OLS (not TOBIT) for three outputs: > > log(1+Y1)= alpha + beta*X + epsilon > log(1+Y2)= alpha + beta*X + epsilon > log(1+Y3)= alpha + beta*X + epsilon > > where Y1= farm income, Y2=nonfarm income, and Y3=total income=Y1+Y2, and X is a > dummy intervention variable. Y1 or Y2 can be 0 but Y3 cannot. And these are the > beta values I'm getting: 0.45 for Y1, 0.35 for Y2 and 0.21 for Y3. My > question: why is the beta for Y3 is smaller than the other two? Shouldn't it be > in between the other two betas? Any explanation will be highly appreciated. > > Thanks. Hussain > > > > > > * > * 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: Explaining apparent inconsistency in regression coefficients***From:*Hussain Samad <hsamad2000@yahoo.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Explaining apparent inconsistency in regression coefficients** - Next by Date:
**st: New Stata Program QUICKICC** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: Explaining apparent inconsistency in regression coefficients** - Next by thread:
**st: New Stata Program QUICKICC** - Index(es):