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]

st: Testing for panel-level heteroskedasticity with xtgls

From   [email protected]
To   [email protected]
Subject   st: Testing for panel-level heteroskedasticity with xtgls
Date   Mon, 31 Jan 2011 04:15:36 +0000 (GMT)

I am a bit confused from the result I got for a LR test. I want to test about 
heteroscedasticity across panels as suggested by the Stata team in their FAQ 

In particular, it is suggested to calculate iterated GLS with only 
heteroskedasticity first and save the likelihood. Then to fit the model but 
without the heteroscedasticity assumption (though it is not specified if this 
second model shall be iterated or it shall be left without this option).

Below is the result I got. i would like also to ask if  my p-value of the test 
now indicates that I have heteroscedasticity or actually not? I am confused 
because they provide no explanation. Moreover, is it a bad sign to get no output 
of estimates for ll(null)?

. lrtest hetero . , df(`df') stats

Likelihood-ratio test                                  LR chi2(16) =    493.43
(Assumption: . nested in hetero)                       Prob > chi2 =    0.0000

   Model |    Obs    ll(null)   ll(model)     df          AIC         BIC
           . |    367           .   -29.55142     29     117.1028    230.3583
   hetero |    367           .    217.1648     46    -342.3296   -162.6829
               Note:  N=Obs used in calculating BIC; see [R] BIC note

*   For searches and help try:

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