Dear Statalisters,
We are estimating an -ivprobit- model and have some questions on the
methodology:
- Is the model specified only for continuous endogenous regressors ?
In the case of a binary specification, it would be more correct to get the
predicted values after a probit specification and use it as instrument ? Or,
in the case of having a continuous specification of the endogenous
regressors, is it more convenient to take it and use ivprobit
straightforward ?
- What is the difference between the predicted probability of
the -mfx- command after -ivprobit- and the mean of the predicted values
of -predict (p)- after estimation ?
- We find contradictory results between the overid test
after -ivprobit- and the same test specifying a Linear Probability
Model -ivreg2-. Is this correct ?
- Finally, we find important differences in terms of endogeneity
testing when using the ML and the Two-Step procedeures and can only wonder
what is the reason for that. Which estimation should we "trust" for
endogneity
testing ?
- In the case of choosing ML are there any test of relevance and
validity of instruments available ? because overid only works after the
two-step option.
Thanks in advance,
Maximo Rossi
Department of Economics
Faculty of Social Sciences
University of Uruguay
[email protected]
***********************************************
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
