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 |
Steve Samuels <sjsamuels@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: Question on xtgls |

Date |
Tue, 13 Dec 2011 19:59:43 -0500 |

Well, I _meant_ that an example in the reference included dummy variables for the panels, not that -xtgls- had an option to insert them. Steve On Dec 12, 2011, at 9:41 PM, Christopher Baum wrote: <> Steve said I'm not expert in this area, Phil, but the -help- references www.stata-journal.com/sjpdf.html?articlenum=st0084. There panels get dummy variables, -i.e. different means. Steve sjsamuels@gmail.com On Dec 9, 2011, at 1:38 PM, Bromiley, Philip wrote: I'm having a little trouble understanding xtgls. The documentation (e.g., page 154 of Stata 12 XT manual) seems to make clear that it is not putting in fixed or random effects for panels but rather is just allowing a complex error structure within panels and across panels. This seems like a different model that what we normally mean by panel estimators. We normally want to allow the mean error to vary by panel (in the u(i,t) term). However, it seems like xtgls retains the assumption that the mean error has expectation zero (with the exception of serial correlation), even though it allows the variance and so forth to vary by panel. What am I missing? I'm not sure why the reference to Blackwell's SJ article appears. I think Steve is wrong, in that the [xt] xtgls shows that xtgls with certain options reproduces regress. Consider webuse grunfeld, clear regress invest mvalue kstock xtgls invest mvalue kstock, panels(iid) corr(independent) nmk xtreg invest mvalue kstock, fe xtgls invest mvalue kstock i.company, panels(iid) corr(independent) nmk Note that the regress and first xtgls are identical in terms of e(b) and e(V), and the xtreg, fe and second xtgls, with explicit fixed effects, are likewise identical. So xtgls is not a fixed-effect estimator, in that it does not allow any coefficient to vary over the panel, including the intercept (unless you put in dummies, of course). Kit Kit Baum | Boston College Economics & DIW Berlin | http://ideas.repec.org/e/pba1.html An Introduction to Stata Programming | http://www.stata-press.com/books/isp.html An Introduction to Modern Econometrics Using Stata | http://www.stata-press.com/books/imeus.html * * 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**:**re:Re: st: Question on xtgls***From:*Christopher Baum <kit.baum@bc.edu>

- Prev by Date:
**RE: st: RE: combination of rolling and if** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: Regression Across Two Groups** - Previous by thread:
**re:Re: st: Question on xtgls** - Next by thread:
**st: is there a way to determine variable storage type within a dofile** - Index(es):