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

# RE: st: St: interpret the result of Hausman test

 From "Hoang Dinh Quoc" To Subject RE: st: St: interpret the result of Hausman test Date Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:31:39 +0700

```I have read about it and it is not clear to me about the interpretation of
the result. It suggests to compare the coefficients of OLS and 2SLS and
suggests the large difference means to reject the null (not problem with
endogeneity); but it does not say how large to reject; for example I am not
sure with the value chi2(1)= 3.31 and Prob>chi2 =0.0687 I can conclude to
reject or not?

Thanks.
Quoc

Test:  Ho:  difference in coefficients not systematic
chi2(1) = (b-B)'[(V_b-V_B)^(-1)](b-B)
=        3.31
Prob>chi2 =      0.0687
(V_b-V_B is not positive definite)

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
[mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Muhammad Anees
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 4:16 PM
To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: st: St: interpret the result of Hausman test

To clear all the problems,

Note the Null of Hausman's Test (read more details from -help hausman-
and any reference therein)
Check the p-value from the results of the test and
Decide whether to Accept or Reject the Null

Is this not like that?

Anees

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Hoang Dinh Quoc <hoangdquoc@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Thanks Anees,
>
>
> The output of model OLS showed the suspected endogenous variable with
> coefficient (.03589) and p-value (0.615); and model ivregress 2sls showed
> the coefficient (.3302337) and p-value (0.025).
>
> My question is which model should I choose and do I have endogeneity
> problem?
>
> Thanks,
> Hoang Dinh Quoc
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
> [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Muhammad Anees
> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 3:45 PM
> To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
> Subject: Re: st: St: interpret the result of Hausman test
>
> Hi,
>
> You can now easily select the model depending on the difference
> between the estimated coefficient of (b) and (B) in the output, you
> skipped. The p-value is self explanatory and suggest you can
> accept/reject (check which one to go for) the null hypothesis of
> Hausaman's test.
>
> Hope this is good now,
> Anees
>
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Hoang Dinh Quoc <hoangdquoc@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Dear Prof. Antonakis,
>>
>> Thank you very much for your quick support.
>>
>> "reg y x
>> est store one
>> ivregress 2sls y (x=z)
>> est store two
>> hausman one two"
>>
>> And I got this result:
>>
>> Test:  Ho:  difference in coefficients not systematic
>>
>>                  chi2(1) = (b-B)'[(V_b-V_B)^(-1)](b-B)
>>                          =        3.31
>>                Prob>chi2 =      0.0687
>>                (V_b-V_B is not positive definite)
>>
>> With is result, can I conclude that no endogeneity problem?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Best,
>> Hoang Dinh Quoc
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
>> [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of John Antonakis
>> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 3:23 PM
>> To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
>> Subject: Re: st: St: interpret the result of Hausman test
>>
>> Hi:
>>
>> I am not quite sure what you have done here.
>>
>> If you want to do this "by hand" do an augmented regression:
>>
>> http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/stat/endogeneity.html
>>
>> Else, use the -endog- option in the user-written program, ivreg2,
>> available from ssc (i.e., ssc install ivreg2, replace), e.g. (for
>> dependent variable y, endogenous regressor x, and instrument z):
>>
>> ivreg2 y (x = z), endog(x).
>>
>> Or do the usual hausman test via Stata, e.g.,
>>
>> reg y x
>> est store one
>> ivregress 2sls y (x=z)
>> est store two
>> hausman one two
>>
>> Finally, you can do this in the new Stata command, -sem- using maximum
>> likelihood:
>>
>> sem (y<-x) (x<-z), cov(e.y*e.x)
>>
>> The test of the correlation between the disturbances is the Hausman
>> test, as we explain in detail here:
>>
>> Antonakis, J., Bendahan, S., Jacquart, P., & Lalive, R. (2010). On
>> making causal claims: A review and recommendations. The Leadership
>> Quarterly, 21(6). 1086-1120.
>> http://www.hec.unil.ch/jantonakis/Causal_Claims.pdf
>>
>> For more basic explanations see:
>>
>> Antonakis, J., Bendahan, S., Jacquart, P., & Lalive, R. (submitted).
>> Causality and endogeneity: Problems and solutions. In D.V. Day (Ed.),
>> The Oxford Handbook of Leadership and Organizations.
>> http://www.hec.unil.ch/jantonakis/Causality_and_endogeneity_final.pdf
>>
>>
>> HTH,
>> 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
>> __________________________________________
>>
>>
>> On 19.04.2012 10:14, Hoang Dinh Quoc wrote:
>>  > Dear Statalist members,
>>  >
>>  > I would like to ask you a question regarding the result of a Hausman
>> test.
>>  >
>>  > My question is, with this result, if I conclude that I have no problem
> of
>>  > endogeneity; in other words, I have no endogenous variable?
>>  >
>>  > I followed these steps:
>>  > 1. regress (OLS) to get a residual
>>  > 2. predict weak_rest1
>>  > 3. regress (OLS) using weak_rest1
>>  > 4. regress 2sls using IV
>>  >
>>  > Here is the result of the t test of the residual:
>>  > . test weak_res1
>>  >
>>  >  ( 1)  weak_res1 = 0
>>  >
>>  >        F(  1,   355) =    3.34
>>  >             Prob > F =    0.0686
>>  >
>>  > With is result, can I conclude that no endogeneity problem?
>>  >
>>  > Thank you very much.
>>  >
>>  > Best regards,
>>  > Hoang Dinh Quoc
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > *
>>  > *   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/
>>
>> *
>> *   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/
>
>
>
> --
>
> Best
> ---------------------------
> Assistant Professor/Programme Coordinator
> COMSATS Institute of Information Technology
> Attock 43600, Pakistan
> http://www.aneconomist.com
>
> *
> *   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/

--

Best
---------------------------
Assistant Professor/Programme Coordinator
COMSATS Institute of Information Technology
Attock 43600, Pakistan
http://www.aneconomist.com

*
*   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/
```