There seems to be an issue with the calculation of marginal effects for spatial models containing a spatially lagged dependent variable (e.g. SAR, SAC, and SDM models). As far as I can tell, there are two ways to calculate marginal effects: (1) including the "effects" option when estimating the model and (2) using the post-estimation command "margins." These should result in the same marginal (total) effect, right? Specifically, the total marginal effect for a given regressor should = (that regressor's estimated coefficient)*[1/(1-rho)] because spatial spillovers produce a geometric series. The use of "margins" gives this result exactly, but the use of "effects" gives a result that is close, but slightly larger. See below for a simple illustration of an SAR model with only one regressor. What is going on here? Why is "effects" not giving the anticipated result? I need to figure this out because, as far as I know, direct and indirect effects can only be obtained using "effects" (not "margins"). Please help. Array
Related Posts with Spatial Model (xsmle) "Effects" vs. "Margins" - Why are they different?
New versions of cprdonsutil and cprdhesutil on SSCThanks as always to Kit Baum, new versions of the cprdonsutil and cprdhesutil packages are now avail…
New packages cprdhesaeutil and cprdhesoputil on SSCThanks once again to Kit Baum, two new packages cprdhesaeutil and cprdhesoputil are now available fo…
STATA commands for PSTR modelHi Team Can STATA 14 run PSTR model? If it does can someone assist with the commands please. …
Error when using -summtab-Hi! I use Stata 15 on a Windows PC (Word 2013), and I am trying to make a descriptive table with th…
Difference-in-difference with multiple treatments and multiple time periodsDear Statalisters, I have job level data and I am trying to estimate the impact of US state labor r…
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 Response to Spatial Model (xsmle) "Effects" vs. "Margins" - Why are they different?
Post a Comment