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: goodness of fit measure fir ivtobit
From
Yuval Arbel <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: goodness of fit measure fir ivtobit
Date
Mon, 24 Sep 2012 18:47:30 +0200
regarding my last quote: we are talking about annual data between 1897
and 1958. I guess the authors' objective was to demonstrate that high
correlation could be spurious
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Yuval Arbel <[email protected]> wrote:
> Nick, if we are aware of the many limitations of the R-Squares that's
> O.K. to report it. My fear is that during a presentation somebody will
> see the low R-Squared and say that given that 88 percent of the
> variance cannot be explained Anat's work is worthless, where this is
> obviously not the case (and believe me, these things happened before).
>
> Finally, a nice anecdote from Johnston and Dinardo's textbook
> (Econometric Methods fourth edition (1997) page 10): they quote
> Plosser and Schwert, who found a +0.91 correlation between the log of
> U.S. nominal income and the log of accumulated sunspots!!!
>
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Nick Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
>> That is a puzzling argument, if indeed it's an argument at all.
>>
>> I don't think anything much in statistics ensures a _causal_
>> relationship (presumably what Yuval means here), short of independent
>> evidence on mechanism or process.
>>
>> If a model is not that great, readers need to know. Sometimes a low
>> R-squared makes that vivid.
>>
>> (People who want to remind me how limited R-squared is should please
>> note that I wrote the FAQ cited below, which comes decorated with
>> multiple warnings.)
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 5:12 PM, Yuval Arbel <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Anat, note that the possibility to calculate the log likelihood is
>>> there regardless of the method of estimation you are employing.
>>>
>>> In addition, I would personally rather avoid presenting an R-Squared
>>> of 0.12, particularly in these kinds of models. As is well known, high
>>> R-Squared does not ensure casual relationship and low R-Squared does
>>> not ensure lack of casual relationship
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Anat (Manes) Tchetchik
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> I haven't thought about the count model, I will definitely try to run
>>>> it! thanks much!
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Maarten Buis <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> That does not sound like censoring at all. I would think of this as a
>>>>> regular count model. There are examples on how to deal with such an
>>>>> iv-model in -help gmm-.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hope this helps,
>>>>> Maarten
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Anat (Manes) Tchetchik
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> Austin Hi,
>>>>>> Thank you very much for your reply!
>>>>>> What I have as a dependent var. are 500 respondents' reports of the
>>>>>> number of times they travelled abroad to visit their friends and
>>>>>> relatives over the course of their adult lives. Some respondents yet,
>>>>>> who have relatives abroad, did not travel at all.
>>>>>> So the observations are censored at zero, with mean =2.2, max =50 and
>>>>>> stdev= 3.8.
>>>>>> Do you think in that case that the general methods of moments will be better?
>>>>>> Thanks much!!!
>>>>>> Anat
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Austin Nichols <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anat (Manes) Tchetchik <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>> You can always -predict- and compute the squared correlation of
>>>>>>> predictions with observed values:
>>>>>>> http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/statistics/r-squared/
>>>>>>> but are you sure your -ivtobit- model is justified? What is the
>>>>>>> process that results in observations being censored? I suspect you
>>>>>>> have a lower limit at zero which is actually a very low conditional
>>>>>>> mean rounded down to zero--am I right? You may be better off with a
>>>>>>> -gmm- model.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Anat (Manes) Tchetchik
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> > Dear statalisters,
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I wonder if anyone knows any goodness of fit that is appropriate for
>>>>>>> > tobit with endogenous
>>>>>>> > variables (ivtobit). Not as in "regular" tobit, stata does not report any
>>>>>>> > goodness of fit measure, any idea how to estimate such a measure?
>>>>>>> > Any response will be greatly appreciated..
>> *
>> * 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/
>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Yuval Arbel
> School of Business
> Carmel Academic Center
> 4 Shaar Palmer Street,
> Haifa 33031, Israel
> e-mail1: [email protected]
> e-mail2: [email protected]
--
Dr. Yuval Arbel
School of Business
Carmel Academic Center
4 Shaar Palmer Street,
Haifa 33031, Israel
e-mail1: [email protected]
e-mail2: [email protected]
*
* 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/