Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
From | Christopher Baum <kit.baum@bc.edu> |
To | "statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu" <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |
Subject | re: Re: st: MIXLOGIT: marginal effects |
Date | Thu, 9 Feb 2012 09:17:11 -0500 |
<> Brendan said To play devil's advocate, let me mention Mood (2010), who argues that where unobserved heterogeneity makes it invalid to compare log-odds estimates sizes across samples, the LPM estimate can be more consistent. To be pedantic (hey--it's my day job): for an econometrician, consistency is analogous to pregnancy: you are or you aren't. You often see discussions of relative efficiency, but I've never heard anyone argue for relative consistency. Kit 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/