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 |
"Schaffer, Mark E" <M.E.Schaffer@hw.ac.uk> |

To |
<statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |

Subject |
st: RE: Robust version of the Hausman test... contradicting results |

Date |
Thu, 14 Jul 2011 22:29:03 +0100 |

Maria, -xtoverid- is an implementation of the test Wooldridge (2002, 2010) describes. (NB: The test is originally due to Arellano (1993); see the -xtoverid- help file.) If you are getting substantively different results when you do the test by hand, it could be because something is missing from your calculations (e.g., the demeaning and quasidemeaning isn't limited to the estimation sample, or you have an unbalanced panel and the theta for quasidemeaning should be a vector rather than a scalar, or...) or it's because you have a very small sample and the dof adjustments for the F stat make a big difference. BTW, internally -xtoverid- gets its test stat by running an RE estimation and augmenting the regression with the regressors in mean-deviation form. In your example, xtreg y x1 x2 x3 x4 mdx1 mdx2 mdx3 mdx4, re vce(cluster id) test mdx1 mdx2 mdx3 mdx4 should give you the same test stat as -xtoverid- and the same coefficients as your by-hand regression using -regress-. HTH, Mark > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Mari Mari > Sent: 12 July 2011 13:48 > To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > Subject: st: Robust version of the Hausman test... > contradicting results > > Dear Statalist, > > I am deciding whether to use a FE or RE model, based on the > results of a robust > version of the Hausman test. I am using Stata 11. Here is > what I did for my > balanced panel. > > * Robust version of the Hausman test (Wooldridge 2002) > quietly xtreg y x1 x2 x3 x4, re > by id: gen T=_N > gen theta=1-sqrt(e(sigma_e)^2/(e(sigma_e)^2+ T*e(sigma_u)^2)) > foreach x in y x1 x2 x3 x4 { > by id: egen mean`x' = mean(`x') > generate md`x' = `x' - mean`x' > generate red`x' = `x' - theta*mean`x' > } > quietly reg redy redx1 redx2 redx3 redx4 mdx1 mdx2 mdx3 > mdx4, vce(cluster id) > test mdx1 mdx2 mdx3 mdx4 > ( 1) mdx1 = 0 > ( 2) mdx2 = 0 > ( 3) mdx3 = 0 > ( 4) mdx4 = 0 > F( 4, 25) = 11.72 > Prob > F = 0.0000 > > This suggests I should use FE > > ______________________________________________________________ > ___________ > > * Robust version of the Hausman test (Schaffer and Stillman, 2006) > quietly xtreg y x1 x2 x3 x4, re cluster(id) > xtoverid > Sargan-Hansen statistic 5.885 Chi-sq(4) P-value = 0.2079 > > This suggests I should use RE > > > Given the tests are providing opposite results, do you have > any suggestion on > how to proceed? > > Thanks! > > Maria > > > * > * 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/ > -- Heriot-Watt University is a Scottish charity registered under charity number SC000278. * * 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: Robust version of the Hausman test... contradicting results***From:*Mari Mari <mari4i@yahoo.com>

- Prev by Date:
**st: re: group based trajectory analysis** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: how to repeat a value?** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: Robust version of the Hausman test... contradicting results** - Next by thread:
**st: SSC Archive** - Index(es):