{smcl} {* 16jun2003}{...} {hline} help for {hi:hausman}{right:manual: {hi:[R] hausman}} {right:dialog: {dialog hausman} } {hline} {title:Hausman specification test} {p 8 16 2}{cmd:hausman} {it:name-consistent} [{it:name-efficient}] [{cmd:,} {cmdab:c:onstant} {cmdab:a:lleqs} {cmdab:sk:ipeqs:(}{it:eqlist}{cmd:)} {cmdab:eq:uations:(}{it:matchlist}{cmd:)} {cmdab:sig:mamore} {cmd:force} {cmdab:tcon:sistent:(}{it:string}{cmd:)} {cmdab:teff:icient:(}{it:string}{cmd:)} {cmd:df(}{it:#}{cmd:)} ] {p 4 4 2} {it:name-consistent} and {it:name-efficient} are names under which estimation results were saved via {help estimates:estimates store}. A period ({cmd:.}) may be used to refer to the last estimation results, even if these were not already stored. Not specifying {it:name-efficient} is equivalent to specifying the last estimation results ({cmd:.}). {title:Description} {p 4 4 2} {cmd:hausman} performs Hausman's (1978) specification test. To use {cmd:hausman}, one has to perform the following steps. {p 6 10 2}(1) obtain an estimator that is {hi:consistent} whether or not the hypothesis is true; {p_end} {p 6 10 2}(2) store the estimation results under a {it:name-consistent} using {help estimates:estimates store}; {p_end} {p 6 10 2}(3) obtain an estimator that is {hi:efficient} (and {hi:consistent}) under the hypothesis that you are testing, but {hi:inconsistent} otherwise; {p_end} {p 6 10 2}(4) store the estimation results under a {it:name-efficient} using {help estimates:estimates store}; {p_end} {p 6 10 2}(5) use {cmd:hausman} to perform the test {p 14 14 2}{cmd:hausman} {it:name-consistent} {it:name-efficient} [{cmd:,} {it:options}] {p 4 4 2} The order of computing the two estimators may be reversed. You have to be careful though to specify to {cmd:hausman} the models in the order "always consistent" first and "efficient under H0" second. It is possible to skip storing the second model and refer to the last estimation results by a period ({cmd:.}). {p 4 4 2} {cmd:hausman} may be used in any context. The order in which you specify the regressors in each model does not matter, but it is your responsibility to assure that the estimators and models are comparable, and satisfy the theoretical conditions (see (1) and (3) above). {title:Options} {p 4 8 2}{cmd:constant} specifies that the estimated intercept(s) are to be included in the model comparison; by default they are excluded. The default behavior is appropriate for models where the constant does not have a common interpretation across the two models. {p 4 8 2}{cmd:alleqs} specifies that all of the equations in the models be used to perform the Hausman test; by default only the first equation is used. {p 4 8 2}{cmd:skipeqs(}{it:eqlist}{cmd:)} specifies in {it:eqlist} the names of equations to be excluded from the test. Equation numbers are not allowed in this context as it is the equation names, along with the variable names, that are used to identify common coefficients. {p 4 8 2}{cmd:equations(}{it:matchlist}{cmd:)} specifies, by number, the pairs of equations that are to be compared, and should have the syntax {p 12 20 2} {it:#c}{cmd::}{it:#e} [{cmd:,} {it:#c}{cmd::}{it:#e}[{cmd:,} {it:...}]] {p 8 8 2}where {it:#c} ({it:#e}) is an equation number of the always-consistent (efficient under H0) estimator. For instance {cmd:equations(1:1)}; {cmd:equations(1:1,2:2)}; or {cmd:equations(1:2)}. If {cmd:equations()} is not specified, equations are matched on equation names. {p 8 8 2}{cmd:equations()} handles the situation when one estimator uses equation names and the other does not. For instance, {cmd:equations(1:1)} means equation 1 is to be tested against equation 1. {cmd:equations(1:1, 2:2)} means equation 1 is to be tested against equation 1 and equation 2 against equation 2. {cmd:equations(1:2)} means equation 1 of the always consistent estimator is to be tested against equation 2 of the efficient-under-H0 estimator. If {cmd:equations()} is specified, options {cmd:alleqs} and {cmd:skipeqs} are ignored. {p 4 8 2}{cmd:sigmamore} allows you to specify that the (co)variance matrices used in the test be based on a common estimate of disturbance variance (sigma2), namely the variance from the efficient estimator. This option provides a proper estimate of the contrast variance for so-called tests of exogeneity and over-identification in instrumental variables regression. This option can only be specified when both estimators save {hi:e(sigma)} or {hi:e(rmse)}. {p 4 8 2}{cmd:force} specifies that the Hausman test is performed even though the assumptions of the Hausman test seem not to be met; e.g., because the estimators were p-weighted. {p 4 8 2}{cmd:tconsistent(}{it:str}{cmd:)} and {cmd:tefficient(}{it:str}{cmd:)} are formatting options. They allow you to specify the headers of the columns of coefficients that default to the names of the models. These options will be primarily of interest to programmers. {p 4 8 2}{cmd:df(}{it:#}{cmd:)} specifies the degrees of freedom for the Hausman test. The default is the matrix rank of the variance of the difference between the coefficients of the two estimators. {title:Examples} Typing {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. xtreg lny educ age, fe}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. est store fixed}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. xtreg lny educ age sex, re}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. hausman fixed .} {p 4 4 2} presents Hausman's (1978) specification test which tests the appropriateness of the random-effects estimator {cmd:xtreg, re}. Typing {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. mlogit travmode age gender income}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. est store all}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. mlogit travmode age gender income, if travmode != 2}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. est store partial}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. hausman partial all, alleqs constant} {p 4 4 2}will perform a Hausman test for independence of irrelevant alternatives (IIA). {p 4 4 2}When one estimator uses equation names and the other does not, specify the {cmd:equations()} option to force the comparison. This is illustrated in the comparison of the OLS estimator and the estimator of the {cmd:regress} part of the {cmd:heckman} model {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. regress mpg price}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. est store reg}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. heckman mpg price, sel(foreign=weight)}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. hausman reg ., eq(1:1)} {p 4 4 2}Comparison of the {cmd:probit} and the selection model of the {cmd:heckman} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. probit foreign weight}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. est store probit_for}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. heckman mpg price, sel(foreign=weight)}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. hausman probit_for ., eq(1:2)} {p 4 4 2}Multiple comparison with the {cmd:equations()} option {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. reg3 (weight mpg price = foreign rep)}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. est store full}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. reg3 (mpg price = foreign rep)}{p_end} {p 8 12 2}{cmd:. hausman . full, eq(1:2, 2:3)} {title:Remark: An alternative to {cmd:hausman}} {p 4 4 2} The assumption that one of the estimators is efficient (i.e., has minimal asymptotic variance) is a demanding one. It is violated, for instance, if your observations are clustered or pweighted, or if your model is somehow misspecified. Moreover, even if the assumption is satisfied, there may be a "small sample" problem with the Hausman test. Hausman's test is based on estimating the variance var(b-B) of the difference of the estimators by the difference var(b)-var(B) of the variances. Under the assumptions (1) and (3), var(b)-var(B) is a consistent estimator of var(b-B), but it is not necessarily positive definite "in finite samples", i.e., in your application. If this is the case, the Hausman test is undefined. Unfortunately, this is not a rare event. Stata supports a generalized Hausman test that overcomes both of these problems. See {help suest} for details. {title:Also see} Manual: {hi:[R] hausman} {p 4 13 2}Online: help for {help suest}; {help lrtest}, {help test}