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: Combining ivregress and heckman
From
Barbara Engels <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: Combining ivregress and heckman
Date
Wed, 15 May 2013 14:28:21 +0200
it's a standard wage equation. the independent, presumably endogenous variables are employment status shares, i.e. for example the share of months that an individual worked full-time during a year, the share of months that it was unemployed etc. ... . Hence I have observations on x and xe for both observed and missing wages. My selection dummy is "labor force participation" which I define as being =1 if the hours worked are positive and =0 for zero hours worked. I assume that the employment status variables are correlated with the error term since I assume that they are correlated with unobserved individual (fixed) effects.
On 15.05.2013, at 14:19, Austin Nichols wrote:
> Barbara Engels <[email protected]>:
>
> Do you have observations on x and xe for the observed and missing y?
> E.g. are you worried about selection into the labor market, and your
> data has workers and nonworkers? Can you specify what the selection
> process is, and what the nature of the endogeneity in xe is?
>
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:54 AM, Barbara Engels <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Thanks for this comment. However, I am not sure I understood it correctly.
>> Say that I want to estimate
>>
>> y x xe
>>
>> where y is the dependent, x and xe the independent variables, where xe are the independent variables presumed to be endogenous.
>>
>> The Heckman two--step is described by
>>
>> heckman y x xe (selection= x xe excl)
>>
>> where excl are the exclusion restrictions and selection is some binary selection variable.
>>
>> the IV would look something like
>>
>> ivregress 2sls y x (xe=instrumentals).
>>
>> Are you saying that I should use "instrumentals" instead of xe in the selection equation, then predict using predict select_xb, psel (=p_hat) and then just add psel to the instruments in ivregress, so that the latter becomes
>>
>> ivregress 2sls y x (xe=instrumentals p_hat)?
>>
>> I am not sure this is what you meant. thanks in advance?
>>
>>
>> On 15.05.2013, at 13:33, Austin Nichols wrote:
>>
>>> Barbara Engels <[email protected]>:
>>> There are some bad suggestions in that thread, IMHO. You can use
>>> -ivregress- or -ivreg2- (SSC) to correct for bias of several
>>> varieties; excluded instruments used in the selection equation can be
>>> used in a first stage probit, then predict to make a new generated
>>> instrument to accompany your other excluded instruments. I.e. use
>>> predicted probability of y1, call it p_hat, as an instrument for y1 at
>>> the same time you use z as an instrument for x.
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 5:33 AM, Barbara Engels <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Dear Statalist users,
>>>>
>>>> I want to estimate a model that accounts both for sample selection like Heckman Two-Step, and endogeneity like ivregress.
>>>> The dependent variable is continuous. The variables to be instrumented appear both in the normal regression and in the selection equation in the Heckman model.
>>>> I found some hints on Statalist (http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2009-08/msg00219.html), but didn't quite understand how to perform the combined "ivheckman" after all.
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
> * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/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/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/