RE: st: xtabond2 year dummies

[Humaira Asad <humairaasad@hotmail.com>]

Thank you Baum for your input, but the problem is that when I use two stage xtabind2 without windmiejer's correction but with year dummies, all coefficients are significant but when I correct them for Windmeijer's correction almost all of them become insignificant.
 
The model works perfectly alright with xtpcse. Please suggest what should I do? My supervisor's area of expertise is political economy :(



Humaira Asad
PhD Research Scholar

UoE Business School

University of Exeter, England
















----------------------------------------
> From: kit.baum@bc.edu
> To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
> Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 11:52:54 -0400
> Subject: re:RE: st: xtabond2 year dummies
>
> <>
> > Yes! you are absolutely right, so what should I do. I mean what should I report as the results?
>
>
> That is something to discuss with your advisor. If you were working with me, I would suggest that you are trying to explain something at, e.g., the firm level that does not seem to have much to do with explanatory factors at the firm level, but is rather almost completely explained by macro effects. Your model suggesting that firm-level factors (or whatever the units are in your panel) play a significant role does not receive support from the data.
>
> Kit Baum | Boston College Economics & DIW Berlin | http://ideas.repec.org/e/pba1.html
> An Introduction to Stata Programming | http://www.stata-press.com/books/isp.html
> An Introduction to Modern Econometrics Using Stata | http://www.stata-press.com/books/imeus.html
>
>
>
>
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ 		 	   		  
*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/