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 |
gsanchez@stata.com |

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

Subject |
st: RE: Error? xtdpdsys assigns explanatory power to fixed effects |

Date |
Wed, 9 Nov 2011 11:26:13 -0600 |

Lara <larasusannakrugman@gmail.com> included a dummy for a panel variable (time invariant variable) in her dynamic panel estimation using -xtabond- and -xtdpdsys-. The first command omits the dummy (because of collinearity) but the second produces a coefficient estimate for that variable. Lara states that: > According to the idea of the estimator it should obviously not do this as > observation entity specific fixed effects are an integral part of the estimator. > To make this point clear I have this example using Stata data: > > use http://www.stata-press.com/data/r11/abdata > gen seven=0 > replace seven=1 if id==7 > xtset id year > > xtabond n L(0/2).(w k) yr1980-yr1984 year seven, vce(robust) > xtdpdsys n L(0/2).(w k) yr1980-yr1984 year seven, vce(robust) > xtabond is doing what it should do and omits the entity specific 'seven' > xtdpdsys estimates some coefficient it shouldn't. Then, Lara asks: > Is this already a known problem? Or isn't it a problem at all? Both commands are handling the dummy variable properly. - Time invariant variables must be omitted from the Arellano/Bond estimation (with -xtabond-) because the model is fitted in first differences and, therefore, the fixed effects are removed from the estimation. In fact, the output for -xtabond- includes a note stating that 'seven' (the time-invariant variable in Lara's code) is omitted because of collinearity. - On the other hand, the Blundell-Bond/Arellano-Bover is a system estimator (implemented by -xtdpdsys-) with one equation in levels and one equation in first differences. Time invariant regressors are omitted for the equation in first differences (as expected) but they are still present in the equation in levels. Thus, getting coefficient estimates for time invariant regressors is correct in this second case. Notice that the output for the dynamic regression with -xtdpdsys- also indicates that 'seven' is (only) omitted for the difference equation. --Gustavo gsanchez@stata.com * * 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/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: RE: Error? xtdpdsys assigns explanatory power to fixed effects***From:*Lara K <larasusannakrugman@gmail.com>

**References**:**st: Error? xtdpdsys assigns explanatory power to fixed effects***From:*Lara K <larasusannakrugman@gmail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Stata see host name on SSH?** - Next by Date:
**st: Creating a frequency distribution from matrix** - Previous by thread:
**st: Error? xtdpdsys assigns explanatory power to fixed effects** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: RE: Error? xtdpdsys assigns explanatory power to fixed effects** - Index(es):