RE: st: RE: Different coefficient magnitudes in ols and 2sls estimation

["Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>]

So, no formal significance test in either case. Thanks for the
clarification. 

Nick 
n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk 


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
[mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Sukesh Patro
Sent: 22 April 2010 19:05
To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: st: RE: Different coefficient magnitudes in ols and 2sls
estimation

Nick,
The coefficients are 0.20 in OLS and 2.00 in 2SLS. To answer your
question, "significantly smaller" in this context means the referee
thinks that this is different enough to be troubling.
Also, to answer a related question from Kit Baum we did a Hausman test
on Y2 and rejected the exogeneity of Y2. So it seems that 2SLS would
be appropriate. We have not done a Sargan or Hansen test. Will look
into that and post the outcome.
Thanks to both of you for your interest.

SSKP


On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Nick Cox <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk> wrote:
> What precisely does "significantly smaller" mean in this discussion?
> Does "significant" mean here anything other than "surprising to me"? I
> don't have an answer to your question, but as you say clarity is
needed
> here.
> Nick
> n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk
*
*   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/