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

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

From |
John Antonakis <[email protected]> |

To |
[email protected] |

Subject |
Re: st: sigma_u = 0 in xtreg, re |

Date |
Mon, 29 Aug 2011 23:14:27 +0200 |

Hi Stas: One clarification; when rho = 0 aren't these estimates simply OLS estimates? Best, J. __________________________________________ Prof. John Antonakis Faculty of Business and Economics Department of Organizational Behavior University of Lausanne Internef #618 CH-1015 Lausanne-Dorigny Switzerland Tel ++41 (0)21 692-3438 Fax ++41 (0)21 692-3305 http://www.hec.unil.ch/people/jantonakis Associate Editor The Leadership Quarterly __________________________________________ On 29.08.2011 22:50, Stas Kolenikov wrote:

Note that you have a very decent R^2, especially the between one. It looks, hence, that all of the bewteen-panel variability in Y is explained by the between-panel variability in X's (the ICC's were quite similar for each of the variables), so there indeed is little left that needs explaining. -xtsum- is somewhat misleading here, as this is a marginal measure, not a conditional one (which is what matters for the regression). Technically speaking, you are hitting a corner solution for sigma_u. In the simplest form of the estimator for sigma_u, it is formed as [mean total square] - [mean within square], so substraction of two non-negative quantities gave you a negative quantity (which was truncated upwards to zero). More elaborate estimators exist that guarantee both within and between sigmas to be positive, but for a vast majority of situations, the simple one should do just fine, so that's what -xtreg, re- does. On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Lloyd Dumont<[email protected]> wrote:Hello, Statalist. I am a little confused by the output from an -xtreg, re- estimate. Basically, I end up with sigma_u = 0, which of course yields rho = 0. That seems very odd to me. I would guess that that should only happen if there is no between-subject variation. But, (I think) I can tell from examining the data that that is not the case. I have tried to create a mini example… First, I will show the xtreg results. Then, I will show you what I think is the evidence that there really IS some between-subject variation. Am I missing something obvious here? Thank you for your help and suggestions. Lloyd Dumont . xtreg Y X, re Random-effects GLS regression Number of obs = 3133 Group variable: ID Number of groups = 31 R-sq: within = 0.4333 Obs per group: min = 1 between = 0.8278 avg = 101.1 overall = 0.4579 max = 124 Wald chi2(1) = 2644.38 corr(u_i, X) = 0 (assumed) Prob> chi2 = 0.0000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Y | Coef. Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- X | -.0179105 .0003483 -51.42 0.000 -.0185932 -.0172279 _cons | 1.004496 .0017687 567.92 0.000 1.001029 1.007963 -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- sigma_u | 0 sigma_e | .07457648 rho | 0 (fraction of variance due to u_i) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ . xtsum X Variable | Mean Std. Dev. Min Max | Observations -----------------+--------------------------------------------+---------------- X overall | 3.277883 3.875116 0 42.5 | N = 3137 between | 1.286754 0 6.890338 | n = 31 within | 3.729614 -3.612455 42.24883 | T-bar = 101.194 . xtsum Y Variable | Mean Std. Dev. Min Max | Observations -----------------+--------------------------------------------+---------------- Y overall | .9457124 .1025887 0 1 | N = 3133 between | .0315032 .8387879 1 | n = 31 within | .0985757 -.0235858 1.106925 | T-bar = 101.065 . * * 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/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: sigma_u = 0 in xtreg, re***From:*Stas Kolenikov <[email protected]>

**References**:**st: sigma_u = 0 in xtreg, re***From:*Lloyd Dumont <[email protected]>

**Re: st: sigma_u = 0 in xtreg, re***From:*Stas Kolenikov <[email protected]>

- Prev by Date:
**st: Question about file...could not be opened** - Next by Date:
**st: large coefficients in logistic regression** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: sigma_u = 0 in xtreg, re** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: sigma_u = 0 in xtreg, re** - Index(es):