Dear all,
Estimating a gmm-system model with xtabond2, N=36 T=6, I got results that showed smaller standard errors of estimates using 1-step robust than using 2-step robust.
I have two questions:
I) Why even diminishing the number of instruments, using the command xtabond2, the warning about the singularity of 2-step weighting matrix is singular?
II) In a case of a small sample, is it better to utilise the 1-step procedure or the Windmeijer's correction is sufficient for face the standard-error bias?
Related Posts with 1-step gmm-sys VS. 2-step
Need Help Merging Two DatasetsDear all, I am using Stata 16, on mac. First I collapsed the first dataset I have by state_fire_yea…
age at first childHello, I am looking at childless men in the UK and I am using panel data which has 9 waves. childles…
How to balance this datasetHi all I am having a hard time thinking about the best way to balance this dataset. The format is: …
Expand and Insert Observations to VariableHi all, Thanks in advance for any suggestions and supports! I am currently trying to expand a datas…
Using gsem with multiply imputed dataI am trying to fit a gsem model using multiply imputed data with multiple continuous factor dependen…
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 Response to 1-step gmm-sys VS. 2-step
Post a Comment