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 |
Diego Anzoategui <diegoanzoa@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
st: Question on aweights |

Date |
Tue, 26 Jul 2011 16:24:19 -0300 |

Dear all, I have a question regarding the aweights. I am using a dataset that has data at firm level for a number of countries. I would like to run some regressions using firm-level data but assigning more weight to those firms that come from countries where fewer firms were surveyed so that all the countries are equally represented in the regression. In my sample I have African countries with only 70 firms surveyed and countries like China with over 1500 firms surveyed. I do not want the results to represent only those countries with a large number of observations. I found that aweights could be useful for this. More specifically, I can use the inverse of the number of firms surveyed in each country as aweights and the results are going to be similar to those obtained taking the average by country and then running the regression without aweights. That is, doing: reg y x [aweight=1/nr_firms] shows the same coefficients as doing this: collapse (mean) y x nr_firms, by(country) and then, reg y x where: y is the dependent variable, x is the independent variable, nr_firms is the number of firms surveyed in each country, country is a string with the name of each country. I have run these two regressions and the coefficients are exactly the same, but the Standard Errors differ. In fact, in the regression using the firm-level data and aweights the variable x is significant at 1 percent, while in the regression of the country averages the same variable is not significant. Obviously, the difference is in the Mean of Square Errors. Why are they that different? I understand that they can be different, but why is there such a big difference in the significance levels. Is anything wrong? Should I change the the SE when I am working with aweights? Thanks in advance ! Diego * * 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/

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: regression diagnostics with complex survey data** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: Propensity score matching: confidence intervals** - Previous by thread:
**st: regression diagnostics with complex survey data** - Next by thread:
**st: weights, which one should I use in this case?** - Index(es):