Dear all,
I have a binary DV with an endogenous X which I instrument with an interaction variable i.treat##i.post.
When using ivprobit and cmp strategy I get different results and that's because of different sample sizes for the first step.
I wanted to know if there is a problem if we use different sample sizes for the 2 steps in an IV startegy (with cmp)?
I also want to argue that cmp is better because error terms may be correlated and therefore cmp will give more efficient results. But I found out that it is written in ivprobit Stata file that using vce(cluster ...) can be used to control for lack of independence between error terms. Does that mean I cannot prefer cmp because it allows for collinearity between error terms since ivprobit can also allow for this when using the cluster option?
Many thanks.
Related Posts with ivprobit or cmp (probit cont)?
Constraining parameters in the nlsur commandHello! I am trying to estimate a Linear expenditure system with the nlsur command. I want to have a…
PS Matching issuesHi to everyone, In a course I am attending, I am asked to reproduce a study presented in a paper and…
Using a Matrix to Identify AnaemiaThis started as a question, but I came up with a solution that I couldn't find documented elsewhere.…
Generate Unique Group ID in a Panel Data with Spelling VariationsDear Statalist users, I have created a panel dataset based on election results (this is a fairly lar…
How to standardize two different samples? Greetings to all. I'm new in the forum and I don't have the best level of English, but I'll try to …
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 Response to ivprobit or cmp (probit cont)?
Post a Comment