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]
st: RE: RE: RE: RE: xtivreg2
From
"Ikuho Kochi" <[email protected]>
To
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject
st: RE: RE: RE: RE: xtivreg2
Date
Wed, 4 Jul 2012 16:01:57 +0000
Mark,
Thank you so much for your quick and thoughtful answer. Your answer helped me a lot!
ikuho
________________________________________
From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Schaffer, Mark E [[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 12:57 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: st: RE: RE: RE: xtivreg2
Ikuho,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ikuho Kochi
> Sent: 03 July 2012 17:35
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: st: RE: RE: xtivreg2
>
> Mark,
>
> Thank you very much for your thoughtful answer for my
> question. It makes sense to me, but your answer brought
> another question to me.
>
> In the same logic, if I understand correctly, the first
> differences model also should not include constant term as
> all constant values will be canceled when differenced over time.
> In the stata manual, the formulation of "xtivreg, fd" seems
> to drop the constant term, but when I run the model with
> "xtivreg, fd" on STATA, I get estimated results with the
> constant term and this command does not allow me to drop
> constant term as an option. "xtivreg2, fd" seems to function
> in the same way (estimate the constant term as default), and
> I wonder why it is programmed that way.
Because in the FD model, the constant term is an estimate of the trend.
FD with nocons estimates the same model as FE.
--Mark
> I appreciate if you could help me to clarify my confusion.
>
> Ikuho
>
> ________________________________________
> From: [email protected]
> [[email protected]] on behalf of Schaffer,
> Mark E [[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2012 5:37 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: st: RE: xtivreg2
>
> Ikuho,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email protected]
> > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> Ikuho Kochi
> > Sent: 02 July 2012 21:58
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: st: xtivreg2
> >
> > Dear fellow econometricians/statisticians
> >
> > I have a question regarding the "xtivreg2" command and would
> > appreciate very much if somebody can help me to clarify some issues.
> >
> > Since I have to estimate HAC fixed models, I am using the
> > xtivreg2 command.
> > However, the xtivreg2 command does not estimate a constant
> term in the
> > fixed effect model (as described in the command
> description), and I am
> > wondering why it is programmed in this way. My
> understanding is that
> > the fixed effect model usually includes a constant term
>
> Actually, that's not the case. Strictly speaking, a fixed
> effects model cannot provide an estimate of the constant
> term. The reason is that a "pure" fixed effects model uses
> *only* within variation to obtain estimates of the
> coefficients. It can't provide estimates of coefficients on
> anything that does not vary within panels, and that includes
> the constant term.
>
> > (when I run the same model with
> > xtivreg command, the constant term appears, so it is not the data
> > problem),
>
> This is because official -xtivreg-, and for that matter
> official -xtreg-, use cross-sectional variation to obtain
> estimates of the constant term. Rather than go into the gory
> details, I'll just say "it's in the manual". Which it is.
>
> Personally, I always found it odd that these commands will
> report an estimated constant term that relies on
> cross-sectional variation even when the -fe- option is
> specified. This is non-standard in econometrics (my home
> territory), but maybe it's standard in other areas - I don't
> know. But I'm the author of -xtivreg2-, and I programmed it
> to behave more in accord with the conventions in my own field of work.
>
> HTH,
> Mark
>
> > or am I missing something? I wonder if the user of this command is
> > expected to include an extra variable with constant values in the
> > fixed effect model so that the constant term will be estimated in
> > fixed model estimation?
> >
> > I appreciate for your time and input...
> >
> > Ikuho Kochi
> > *
> > * 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/
> >
>
>
> --
> Heriot-Watt University is the Sunday Times Scottish
> University of the Year 2011-2012
>
> Heriot-Watt University is a Scottish charity registered under
> charity number SC000278.
>
>
> *
> * 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/
>
--
Heriot-Watt University is the Sunday Times
Scottish University of the Year 2011-2012
Heriot-Watt University is a Scottish charity
registered under charity number SC000278.
*
* 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/