Stata The Stata listserver
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

RE: st: Inverse Mills Ratio after MLOGIT

From   "Steven Stillman (LMPG)" <[email protected]>
To   "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
Subject   RE: st: Inverse Mills Ratio after MLOGIT
Date   Fri, 18 Apr 2003 12:37:41 +1200

David, Mushfiq:  While Mushfiq advice on calculating the Inverse Mills
Ratios for an mlogit model is correct, your approach of calculating the IMR
and using them as regressors in a second-stage logit model will not give you
consistent estimates of this model.  The two-step approach to estimating
selection models using IMR only produces consistent estimates when the
second-stage is a linear regression model.  If as in your case the second
stage model is a non-linear model, the system of equations needs to be
estimated using ML-methods.   This is why the stata command heckprob has no
two-step option.  


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	A. Mushfiq Mobarak [SMTP:[email protected]]
> Sent:	Wednesday, April 09, 2003 5:20 AM
> To:	[email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject:	RE: st: Inverse Mills Ratio after MLOGIT
> David,
> Let me answer the second question first. To my knowledge, the IMR are a
> function of the predicted probabilities of the various outcomes in your
> first stage mlogit regression. 
> For your four outcomes, you first have to create variables for your
> predicted probabilities of each outcome. Right after running the mlogit,
> you can type:
> predict p0 if e(sample), outcome(0);
> predict p1 if e(sample), outcome(1);
> predict p2 if e(sample), outcome(2);
> predict p3 if e(sample), outcome(3);
> You then have to use p0,p1,p2,p3 to create the 3 mills ratio terms.
> According to formulas given by Dubin and McFadden (Econometrica circa
> 1984), the following code would create the mills terms: (you should
> check whether the formulas below are appropriate for your particular
> problem)
> gen trnsp0=(p0*ln(p0))/(1-p0);
> gen trnsp1=(p1*ln(p1))/(1-p1);
> gen trnsp2=(p2*ln(p2))/(1-p2);
> gen trnsp3=(p3*ln(p3))/(1-p3);
> gen millsp1=3*ln(p1)+ trnsp0 +trnsp2 +trnsp3;
> gen millsp2=3*ln(p2)+ trnsp0 +trnsp1 +trnsp3;
> gen millsp3=3*ln(p3)+ trnsp0 +trnsp1 +trnsp2;
> You can plug in millsp1-millsp3 in your second stage logit. If you are
> interested in the standard errors for the mills ratio terms in the
> second stage logit, then more work has to be done - you should probably
> bootstrap errors.
> As to your first question, in my opinion, this is a fine thing to do, as
> long as you have a variable that helps identify the covariance in the
> first and second stage error terms. If you're using the exact same set
> of variables in your first and second stages, then only the
> non-linearity of the Mills ratio terms is used for identification, and
> according to the literature on selection correction, this is not a good
> way to proceed. There's a paper in the Journal of Economic Surveys on
> the Heckman selection correction that discusses these issues.
> -Mushfiq
> A. Mushfiq Mobarak
> Assistant Professor of Economics
> University of Colorado at Boulder
> 303-492-8872
> Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 08:52:28 -0600
> From: David Leblang <[email protected]>
> Subject: st: Inverse Mills Ratio after MLOGIT
> Listers,
> I am trying to estimate a selection type model in the tradition of the 
> heckprob command however where the first stage has multiple outcomes 
> (four) and the second stage is a standard logit/probit.  My approach to 
> this is to estimate the first stage as a multinomial logit, get the 
> predicted probabilities, and plug them into the second stage logit. 
> However, because I assume that the errors from the first and second 
> stage models are correlated, I want to generate the inverse mills ratio 
> (IMR) from the first stage multinomial logit and add those in the second
> stage equation (this is discussed in Millimet's faq on endogeniety). 
> Here are my questions:
> 1.  from a statistical point of view, does this make sense?
> 2.  how can I obtain the IMR after the mlogit?  I have searched the 
> faqs, etc but cannot find an answer.
> Thanks,
> David Leblang
> University of Colorado
> *
> *   For searches and help try:
> *
> *
> *

The information contained in this document is intended only for the
 addressee and is not necessarily the views nor the official 
communication of the Department of Labour.  All final/official papers 
which are sent from the Department will be sent by non-electronic
means, on appropriate letterhead, signed by authorised personnel.
*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2024 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index