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

Re: st: model with censored dependent variable and binary endogenous variable


From   Malgosia Madajewicz <[email protected]>
To   [email protected]
Subject   Re: st: model with censored dependent variable and binary endogenous variable
Date   Tue, 20 Jul 2004 11:18:41 -0400

Thank you for the reply.

I actually have a two-equation model. The equation for the endogenous variable should be estimated as a probit. The second-stage equation for the censored dependent variable of interest should be estimated as a Tobit. I'd rather not use Heckman, because I don't need to rely on functional form for identification. I have an IV. So I essentially want to do the equivalent of 2SLS, but 2SLS itself would give inconsistent estimators.

Yes, I see that I could write a ml procedure, but I have never done this before and I wonder if anyone has already written a procedure to do something similar which I could use as an example?

Thanks in advance,

Malgosia

At 08:56 AM 7/20/2004, you wrote:

> could anyone offer any advice about estimating a model in which the
> dependent variable is censored and which has a binary endogenous
> variable?  The dependent variable takes both positive and negative
> values, but has a mass at 0. I also need to use pweights and estimate
> clustered standard errors (I'm using survey data).

This is what I would do.

. set imho on :)

It looks like you have three equations here.

The first one takes care of the binary endogeneous variable. Let's say
this is probit.

The second one takes care of the point mass at zero, so it is a probit
again, where the dependent variable is an indicator of whether your
variable of interest hits zero or not. This is a standard way -- see for
instance -zip- in Stata.

The third one is the equation for the regression if the dependent variable
is not zero.

You can try to get hold of this stage by stage. You would need to extract
the inverse Mills' ratio from the first equation in the spirit of Heckman
/ treatreg model (so all concerns regarding identification in such models
apply). Then you plug it into the second and the third equations. You can
get cluster-corrected standard errors with probit and regress without much
problem, but it is going to be tough to ensure that you have the same
coefficients across the second and the third equations, if that's a
concern to you.

Your ultimate choice would be to write a maximum likelihood estimator with
the suite of -ml- commands. As far as this is a relatively straightforward
(although rather involved) observation-by-observation likelihood, Stata
can handle the -[pw=] , cluster(psu)- automatically with its -lf- form of
the -ml- routine. I think it suffices to specify something like -svy-
somewhere in the header of your maximum likelihood program, but I am not
100% sure about that.

 ---                                    Stas Kolenikov
 --       Ph.D. student in Statistics at UNC-Chapel Hill
 - http://www.komkon.org/~tacik/  -- [email protected]

* This e-mail and all attachments to it are not intended to provide any
* reasonable point of view and was transmitted to you in error. It
* should be immediately deleted by all recipients unless they really
* enjoy communicating with the author :). Other restrictions apply.

*
*   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/
Assistant Professor of Economics and International Affairs
Columbia University
SIPA
IAB 1304, MC 3323
420 West 118th Street
New York, N.Y. 10027

tel: (212) 854-4311
fax: (212) 854-5765
*
* 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/




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