|From||"joe jacob" <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Subject||Re: st: 3sls, selection|
|Date||Tue, 09 Sep 2003 06:58:32 +0000|
From: Chris Rohlfs <email@example.com>_________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: st: 3sls, selection
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 15:36:58 -0500 (CDT)
could you please describe the variables you're looking at ?
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, joe jacob wrote:
> Dear all,
> This is my first mail to statalist and this mail is made after days of
> learning from the discussions in the listserver.
> I have a two-equation system to estimate.
> Eq. (1) y1 = y2 + x1 + x2 +x3+x4+ u
> Eq. (2) y2 = y1 + x1 + x2+v,
> with the endogenous variables y1 and y2 (both continuous) appearing in the
> RHS of both equations. Thus a simultaneous equation is of course the right
> way to proceed.
> But variable y1 needs to be corrected for the Selection hazard using the
> Heckman procedure. This is because some observations are zero due to 'self
> selection'. Thus we have a selection equation involving the variables (y2,
> x1, x2 ,x3,x4,x5).
> One approach I could think of is to calculate the IMR from heckman
> estimation of equation 1, plugging it back in the same equation and running
> a 3sls estimation involving equations 1 and 2. BUT I think that does not
> make much sense because IMR is calculated from two equations (Eqn 1 and the
> selection equation) that has an endogenous explanatory variable (y2).
> My question is how could I take care of these two problems. 1. The
> endogeneity (simultaneity) of y1 and y2 , 2.the selection bias pertaining to
> variable y1.
> Thanks in advance for your kind suggestions.
> Itty Jacob
> PS: My apologies for any wrong terminology.
> Need more e-mail storage? Get 10MB with Hotmail Extra Storage.
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
* For searches and help try: