Dear all,
I am doing some heckman estimations. However the model runds from hours without end.. I tried by estimating a probit model for the first step and then using the predicted probabilities to generate the inverse of the Mills ratio to use as a regressor in my model of interest. This approach works fine and I was wondering if the result would have been the same as if I had used the heckan command. To test this, I did both approaches in a different model and I got very similar results. However, I am wondering what are the methodological differences among both methods. Does not the heckman command do what I did by running first the probit model and then running an OLS regression in which I control for the inverste of the Mills ratio? Does anyone know the answer?
Kind regards in advance.
Related Posts with Heckman command vs a step by step approach
dropping observations with specific values in two different variablesDear Statalisters, I am currently analysing an employer survey where each observation is an employi…
Time-varying betaDear all, I am currently studying mutual equity fund returns in regard to the four-factor model of …
Interpreting negative binomial coefficient with log IVHello, I'm having a hard time trying to interpret the results of a negative binomial regression (xt…
import .json data in stataHello everybody, I have to get the data from a .json file in stata. I have been using the following…
code test Code: 𝐿𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑖,𝑘,𝑡 = α + β ∗ Hofstede′s Cultural dimensions𝑘 + γ1 ∗ Firm l…
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 Response to Heckman command vs a step by step approach
Post a Comment