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: conception confusion - "fixed effects" and time effect on data with time factor
From
Maarten Buis <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: conception confusion - "fixed effects" and time effect on data with time factor
Date
Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:38:58 +0200
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:50 PM, House Wang wrote:
> Yes, I think the the variable I am by proxy controlling for is in fact
> intervening dependent variables.
In that case you should definatively _not_ control for year.
> I have a related question. Is it O.K. that I directly add year as a
> variable in the model, instead of i.year?
It is legal stata syntax, but whether it makes sense depends on the
substantive background. Adding year means you estimate a linear trend,
while adding i.year means you add a dummy/indicator-variable for every
year. Only you can decide which one makes sense.
Hope this helps,
Maarten
--------------------------
Maarten L. Buis
Institut fuer Soziologie
Universitaet Tuebingen
Wilhelmstrasse 36
72074 Tuebingen
Germany
http://www.maartenbuis.nl
--------------------------
*
* 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/