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 at the end of May, and its replacement, statalist.org is already up and running.


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: st: St: interpret the result of Hausman test


From   Muhammad Anees <anees@aneconomist.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: St: interpret the result of Hausman test
Date   Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:44:43 +0500

Hi,

You can now easily select the model depending on the difference
between the estimated coefficient of (b) and (B) in the output, you
skipped. The p-value is self explanatory and suggest you can
accept/reject (check which one to go for) the null hypothesis of
Hausaman's test.

Hope this is good now,
Anees

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Hoang Dinh Quoc <hoangdquoc@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Prof. Antonakis,
>
> Thank you very much for your quick support.
>
> I followed your suggestion:
> "reg y x
> est store one
> ivregress 2sls y (x=z)
> est store two
> hausman one two"
>
> And I got this result:
>
> Test:  Ho:  difference in coefficients not systematic
>
>                  chi2(1) = (b-B)'[(V_b-V_B)^(-1)](b-B)
>                          =        3.31
>                Prob>chi2 =      0.0687
>                (V_b-V_B is not positive definite)
>
> With is result, can I conclude that no endogeneity problem?
>
> Thanks,
> Best,
> Hoang Dinh Quoc
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
> [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of John Antonakis
> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 3:23 PM
> To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
> Subject: Re: st: St: interpret the result of Hausman test
>
> Hi:
>
> I am not quite sure what you have done here.
>
> If you want to do this "by hand" do an augmented regression:
>
> http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/stat/endogeneity.html
>
> Else, use the -endog- option in the user-written program, ivreg2,
> available from ssc (i.e., ssc install ivreg2, replace), e.g. (for
> dependent variable y, endogenous regressor x, and instrument z):
>
> ivreg2 y (x = z), endog(x).
>
> Or do the usual hausman test via Stata, e.g.,
>
> reg y x
> est store one
> ivregress 2sls y (x=z)
> est store two
> hausman one two
>
> Finally, you can do this in the new Stata command, -sem- using maximum
> likelihood:
>
> sem (y<-x) (x<-z), cov(e.y*e.x)
>
> The test of the correlation between the disturbances is the Hausman
> test, as we explain in detail here:
>
> Antonakis, J., Bendahan, S., Jacquart, P., & Lalive, R. (2010). On
> making causal claims: A review and recommendations. The Leadership
> Quarterly, 21(6). 1086-1120.
> http://www.hec.unil.ch/jantonakis/Causal_Claims.pdf
>
> For more basic explanations see:
>
> Antonakis, J., Bendahan, S., Jacquart, P., & Lalive, R. (submitted).
> Causality and endogeneity: Problems and solutions. In D.V. Day (Ed.),
> The Oxford Handbook of Leadership and Organizations.
> http://www.hec.unil.ch/jantonakis/Causality_and_endogeneity_final.pdf
>
>
> HTH,
> J.
>
> __________________________________________
>
> Prof. John Antonakis
> Faculty of Business and Economics
> Department of Organizational Behavior
> University of Lausanne
> Internef #618
> CH-1015 Lausanne-Dorigny
> Switzerland
> Tel ++41 (0)21 692-3438
> Fax ++41 (0)21 692-3305
> http://www.hec.unil.ch/people/jantonakis
>
> Associate Editor
> The Leadership Quarterly
> __________________________________________
>
>
> On 19.04.2012 10:14, Hoang Dinh Quoc wrote:
>  > Dear Statalist members,
>  >
>  > I would like to ask you a question regarding the result of a Hausman
> test.
>  >
>  > My question is, with this result, if I conclude that I have no problem of
>  > endogeneity; in other words, I have no endogenous variable?
>  >
>  > I followed these steps:
>  > 1. regress (OLS) to get a residual
>  > 2. predict weak_rest1
>  > 3. regress (OLS) using weak_rest1
>  > 4. regress 2sls using IV
>  >
>  > Here is the result of the t test of the residual:
>  > . test weak_res1
>  >
>  >  ( 1)  weak_res1 = 0
>  >
>  >        F(  1,   355) =    3.34
>  >             Prob > F =    0.0686
>  >
>  > With is result, can I conclude that no endogeneity problem?
>  >
>  > Thank you very much.
>  >
>  > Best regards,
>  > Hoang Dinh Quoc
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > *
>  > *   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/
>
> *
> *   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/



-- 

Best
---------------------------
Muhammad Anees
Assistant Professor/Programme Coordinator
COMSATS Institute of Information Technology
Attock 43600, Pakistan
http://www.aneconomist.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/


© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index