Re: st: RE: RE: bootstrap reject()

[Shehzad Ali <drshehzad_ali@yahoo.com>]

Thanks, Nick and Maarten. 

Very helpful suggestions.
Shehzad


________________________________
>From: Nick Cox <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>
>To: "'statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu'" <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>
>Sent: Tuesday, 1 November 2011, 14:38
>Subject: RE: st: RE: RE: bootstrap reject()
>
>I'd endorse the spirit of this, but the syntax should I think be in terms of r(costdiff): -bootstrap- sees r(costdiff) as input and produces costdiff as output in this case. 
>
>Nick 
>n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk 
>
>Maarten Buis
>Sent: 01 November 2011 14:18
>To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
>Subject: Re: st: RE: RE: bootstrap reject()
>
>On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Shehzad Ali <drshehzad_ali@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I wasn't sure, however, about the syntax of the -reject()- option. It does not seem to work with -if- statements only. If we want to 'reject if costdiff>1000', what would be the best way to do this using the -reject- option?
>
>
>The quote the helpfile of -bootstrap-: "reject(exp) identifies an
>expression that indicates when results should be rejected.  When exp
>is true, the resulting values are reset to missing values." So you
>just use the expression you already stated (i.e. without -if-).
>However, this looks extremely dodgey: that way you can make your
>standard error as small as you like. My take on this is that your
>collegue will just have to live with the fact that his/her effects are
>not significant, or at the very least use Nick's suggestion so that
>the readers can choose for themselves whether they believe the dodgey
>or the real estimates...
>
>
>*
>*   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/