Bookmark and Share

Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

re:RE: st: why reg3 dropped constant term ?

From   Christopher Baum <[email protected]>
To   <[email protected]>
Subject   re:RE: st: why reg3 dropped constant term ?
Date   Sun, 2 Jan 2011 08:50:54 -0500

Here is what I have typed in Stata and the Stata estimated output.

Manually (using hand to type in Stata command window,

reg3 (Leverage: d.lvr=l.lvr d.rwar roa llpta lta liq hhi y_2 y_3 y_4 y_5 y_6 y_7 y_8) (Prisk: d.rwar = l.rwar d.lvr llpta liq lta hhi y_2 y_3 y_4 y_5 y _6 y_7 y_8), small

Note that:  
D.cbf and D.rwar are the only two endogenous variables in this model, and that all other variables are   considered to be exogenous in this model.

Try estimating each of these equations via single-equation methods such as -ivregress 2sls- to better diagnose the issues with collinearity. Do y_2-y_8 comprise a complete set of year dummies (or is there an excluded y_1)? 

Keep in mind that with each equation estimated with a first difference as the response variable, a constant term would constitute a linear trend coefficient in the level of the response variable. Do you really mean to test for the existence of such a linear trend in levels?


Kit Baum   |   Boston College Economics & DIW Berlin   |
                              An Introduction to Stata Programming  |
   An Introduction to Modern Econometrics Using Stata  |

*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2018 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index