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: rectangulizing data

From   Austin Nichols <>
Subject   Re: st: rectangulizing data
Date   Thu, 26 May 2011 14:30:48 -0400

Dmitriy Krichevskiy <> :
The SIPP sample is nationally representative (at least in wave 1). Yours is not.
Look at job start and end dates; there is much of the story on
intrayear volatility.
And yes, it is much higher than you think it is based on your
convenience sample.
I will not take a position on how you should proceed with your research.

On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Dmitriy Krichevskiy
<> wrote:
> Thanks for the links Austin,
> I am lucky to find an expert on both the matter and the data. I am
> basically finding similar results as your paper though my interest is
> in self-employment vs. wage work. I am still puzzled by the enormous
> volatility an average individual faces. Out of the small sample of
> people I personally know no one is subjected to such fluctuations,
> most certainly no one working for a wage. This makes me uncomfortable
> because either I  and the people I know are not a good representative
> of an average individual or (more worrisome scenario) those
> participating in SIPP are some strange individuals self-selecting to
> participate.
> Back to the issue at hand: would you abandon attempts to calculate
> annual income, impute or drop people missing several months?
> By abandoning I presume switching to 4 month cumulative (or average) intervals.

*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2015 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index