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 on April 23, and its replacement, 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   "Hoang Dinh Quoc" <>
To   <>
Subject   RE: st: St: interpret the result of Hausman test
Date   Mon, 23 Apr 2012 09:42:41 +0700


Given the fact that OLS estimates is not significant and the IV estimate is,
do you mean that the endogeneity test is not appropriate?



-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf Of Austin Nichols
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 10:14 PM
Subject: Re: st: St: interpret the result of Hausman test

John Antonakis <>:
Not odd at all given the magnitudes of coefs.

Note that a purported test of endogeneity or exogeneity is a test that
IV and OLS coefs differ statistically, and relies crucially on the
usual IV assumptions; if your exclusion restriction is no good,
then neither is a test of endogeneity or exogeneity.

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 6:21 AM, John Antonakis <>
> Odd that your OLS estimates is not significant and the iv estimate is.
>  Perhaps others can shed light on this.
> Are you sure you are including the same control variables (exogenous) in
> each model?
> What, precisely, is the syntax for the reg and ivreg2 models?

> On 20.04.2012 11:37, Hoang Dinh Quoc wrote:
>> Thank you very much for your explanation, Prof.
>> Yes, it seems to be quite different between iv and ols; for the variable
>> (suspect var for endogenous), the model ols shows the coefficient is
>> .03589
>> and the p-value 0.615; but the ivreg2 shows coefficient .3302337 and p
>> value
>> 0.020.
>> Did you mean that I would better take the ovreg2 for the final result?
>> Best,
>> Quoc

*   For searches and help try:

*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2016 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index