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]
Re: st: Dyadic fixed effects and areg, absorb
From
Nick Cox <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: Dyadic fixed effects and areg, absorb
Date
Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:55:17 +0100
"friend" was some subconscious insertion for "field".
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 3:54 PM, Nick Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
> It starts sounding like a statistical equivalent of a rather empty
> model. If I say, interactions between countries over time depend on
> precisely which countries and precisely when, the reaction to those
> words is, Well, yes. If you say, and here are thousands of parameters
> to summarize that, how is that scientifically or practically
> interesting or useful?
>
> I don't know what your overall objective is. Are you a student and you
> want to pass an examination or to get a degree? Are you a researcher
> and you want a publishable paper? Either way, as you ask for
> reactions, mine is that I would expect anyone in your friend to be
> more interested in a much more parsimonious model.
>
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 3:31 PM, emanuele mazzini
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Dear all Stata users,
>> I am trying to work out a regression with an unbalanced bilateral
>> panel dataset in which I need to include both dyadic fixed effects and
>> year fixed effects. Since my dataset is very huge (it includes more
>> than 600,000 observations) and I cannot generate a dummy for the
>> variable dyads (which is the unique dyads identifier), I thought that
>> I can accomplish this by using the following command:
>>
>> areg...., absorb(dyads)
>>
>> by including only the dummies that refer to the years to take into
>> account the year fixed effects, while absorb(dyads) is supposed to
>> take into account the dyadic fixed effects.
>>
>> I am not looking really for an help, but more for an advice: what do
>> you think about this solution to my problem (i.e. to the impossibility
>> to generate more than 15,000 dummies)? Do you think this may work?
>>
>> Thanks to all of you in advance for your time and consideration,
>
*
* 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/