After implementing an IV probit model, the signs of many exogenous covariates' coefficient estimates have been flipped, compared to the signs in the baseline probit model. These signs are now at odds with the past literature. I originally thought the IV approach would only significantly impact the coefficient estimates of the endogenous variables. What does this indicate? Is it because my instrument is not valid?
BTW, my model has two endogenous variables and two instruments.
Related Posts with IV approach flips the signs of exogenous covariates' coefficient estimates
xtabond2: Model EvaluationDear Statalisters, I am working on determinants of corporate cash holdings with a panel dataset of …
Change in dependent variable suggests change in estimation methodI'd greatly appreciate any help with this. When regressing the following, a hausman test confirms th…
Correlation between two vectorsDear Statalister, I am currently working with data which include patents, patent classes and year. …
Problem With Xtabond2 In Dynamic Panel Data Concerning Omitted Lagged Coefficients Reported in OutputDear Statalist users. I am using the xtabond2 to draw advantage of the twostep System GMM approach …
Problem in running regression with beta/coefficient that are estimated based on month, year, and countryHi, I am currently working on a panel dataset (15 EU countries for 15 years). I have approximately …
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 Response to IV approach flips the signs of exogenous covariates' coefficient estimates
Post a Comment