Simplified implementation of the Heckman Estimator of the Dynamic Probit Model and a comparison with alternative estimators
Arulampalam, Wiji and Stewart, Mark B. (2008) Simplified implementation of the Heckman Estimator of the Dynamic Probit Model and a comparison with alternative estimators. Working Paper. Coventry: University of Warwick, Department of Economics. (Warwick economic research papers).
WRAP_Arulampalam_twerp_884.pdf - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Official URL: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/resear...
This paper presents a convenient shortcut method for implementing the Heckman estimator of the dynamic random effects probit model and other dynamic nonlinear panel data models using standard software. It then compares the estimators proposed by Heckman, Orme and Wooldridge, based on three alternative approximations, first in an empirical model for the probability of unemployment and then in a set of simulation experiments. The results indicate that none of the three estimators dominates the other two in all cases. In most cases all three estimators display satisfactory performance, except when the number of time periods is very small.
|Item Type:||Working or Discussion Paper (Working Paper)|
|Subjects:||Q Science > QA Mathematics
H Social Sciences > HA Statistics
|Divisions:||Faculty of Social Sciences > Economics|
|Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):||Estimation theory, Economics -- Mathematical models, Mathematical statistics, Econometric models|
|Series Name:||Warwick economic research papers|
|Publisher:||University of Warwick, Department of Economics|
|Place of Publication:||Coventry|
|Number of Pages:||41|
|Status:||Not Peer Reviewed|
|Access rights to Published version:||Open Access|
|Funder:||Economic and Social Research Council (Great Britain) (ESRC)|
|Grant number:||RES-000-22-0651 (ESRC), RES-000-22-2611 (ESRC)|
|References:||Alessie, R. Hochguertel, S. and van Soest, A. (2004). ‘Ownership of Stocks and Mutual Funds: A Panel Data Analysis’, Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 86, pp. 783-796. Andrén, T. (2007). ‘The persistence of welfare participation’, Göteborg University, Working Papers in Economics, No. 266. Arulampalam, W. (1999). ‘A Note on estimated effects in random effect probit models’, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 61, pp. 597-602. Arulampalam, W. and Bhalotra, S. (2006). ‘Sibling death clustering in India: genuine scarring versus unobserved heterogeneity’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Vol. 169, pp. 829-848. Arulampalam, W., Booth, A.L. and Taylor, M.P. (2000). ‘Unemployment persistence’, Oxford Economic Papers, Vol. 52, pp. 24-50. Audas, R., Barmby, T. and Treble, J. (2004). ‘Luck, Effort, and Reward in an Organizational Hierarchy’, Journal of Labor Economics, Vol. 22, pp. 379-395. Benito, A. and Young, G. (2003). ‘Hard times or great expectations? Dividend omissions and dividend cuts by UK firms’, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 65, pp. 531-555. Bernard, A.B. and Jensen J.B. (2004). ‘Why some firms export’, Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 86, pp. 561-569. Butler, J.S. and Moffitt, R. (1982). ‘A computationally efficient quadrature procedure for the one-factor multinomial probit model’, Econometrica, Vol. 50, pp. 761-764. Cappellari, L. and Jenkins, S.P. (2008). ‘The dynamics of social assistance receipt: Measurement and modelling issues, with an application to Britain’, ISER Essex, Working Paper No. 2008-34. Chauvin, N. and Kraay, A. (2007). ‘Who gets debt relief?’, Journal of the European Economic Association, Vol. 5, pp. 333-342. Chen, J. and Entrom Ost, C. (2005). ‘Housing allowance and the recipient’s homeownership: Evidence from a panel data study in Sweden’, Housing Studies, Vol. 20, pp. 605-625. Clark A.E. and Etilé, F. (2006). ‘Don’t give up on me baby: Spousal correlation in smoking behaviour’, Journal of Health Economics, Vol. 25, pp. 958-978 Contoyannis, P., Jones, A.M. and Rice, N. (2004). ‘The dynamics of health in the British Household Panel Survey’, Journal of Applied Econometrics, Vol. 19, pp. 473-503. Dorsett, R. (1999). ‘An econometric analysis of smoking prevalence among lone mothers’, Journal of Health Economics, Vol. 18, pp. 429-441. Heckman, J.J. (1981a). ‘Heterogeneity and state dependence,’ in S. Rosen (ed.), Studies in Labor Markets, Chicago Press: Chicago, IL. Heckman, J.J. (1981b). ‘The incidental parameters problem and the problem of initial conditions in estimating a discrete time-discrete data stochastic process’, in C.F. Manski and D. McFadden (eds), Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with Econometric Applications, MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, pp. 114-178. Henley, A. (2004). ‘Self-employment status: The role of state dependence and initial circumstances’, Small Business Economics, Vol. 22, pp. 67- 82. Honoré, B.E. (1993). ‘Orthogonality conditions for Tobit models with fixed effects and lagged dependent variables’, Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 59, pp. 35-61. Honoré, B.E. and Kyriazidou, E. (2000). ‘Panel data discrete choice models with lagged dependent variables’, Econometrica. Vol. 68, pp. 839-874. Hsiao, C. (2003). Analysis of Panel Data. Second Edition. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. Hyslop, D.E. (1999). ‘State dependence, serial correlation and heterogeneity in intertemporal labor force participation of married women’, Econometrica, Vol. 67, pp. 1255-1294. Islam, N. (2007). ‘A dynamic Tobit model of female labour supply’. Göteborg University, Discussion Paper No. 259. Lee, W. and Oguzoglu, U. (2007). ‘Income support and stigma effects for young Australians’, Australian Economic Review, Vol. 40, pp. 369-384. Loudermilk, MS. (2007). ‘Estimation of fractional dependent variables in dynamic panel data models with an application to firm dividend policy’, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, Vol. 25, pp. 462-472. Mundlak, Y. (1978). ‘On the pooling of time series and cross section data’, Econometrica, Vol. 46, pp. 69-85. Nerlove, M. (1971). ‘Further evidence on the estimation of dynamic economic relations from a time series of cross sections’, Econometrica, Vol. 39, pp. 359-382. Orme, C.D. (1997). ‘The initial conditions problem and two-step estimation in discrete panel data models’, mimeo, University of Manchester. Orme, C.D. (2001). ‘Two-step inference in dynamic non-linear panel data models’, mimeo, University of Manchester. Propper, C. (2000). ‘The demand for private health care in the UK’, Journal of Health Economics, Vol. 19, pp. 855-876. Pudney, S. (2008). ‘The dynamics of perception: Modelling subjective wellbeing in a short panel’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, Vol. 171, pp. 21-40. Requena-Silvente, F. (2005). ‘The decision to enter and exit foreignmarkets: Evidence from U.K. SMEs’, Small Business Economics, Vol. 25, pp. 237-53. StataCorp. (2008). Stata Statistical Software: Release 10, College Station, TX: StataCorp LP. Stewart, M.B. (2007). ‘Inter-related dynamics of unemployment and lowwage employment’, Journal of Applied Econometrics, Vol. 22, pp. 511- 531. Wooldridge, J. (2002). Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA. Wooldridge, J. (2005). ‘Simple solutions to the initial conditions problem in dynamic, nonlinear panel data models with unobserved heterogeneity’, Journal of Applied Econometrics, Vol. 20, pp. 39-54.|
Actions (login required)