Econometric Reviews · 2004 · 663 citations · 22 references
Social SciencesEconomicsBehavioral EconomicsCausal InferenceEconometricsBinary Response ModelsDiscrete Choice ModelsMicroeconometricsPanel Data AnalysisPanel Data MethodsIncidental Parameters ProblemMaximum Likelihood EstimatorNonlinear Panel ModelsPanel Data EstimationTobit RegressionTobit Type ModelsTruncated RegressionTruncated Regression Models
In nonlinear panel data models with fixed effects, the MLE is generally biased and inconsistent for small T, yet little evidence exists beyond binary choice models such as probit and logit. The study uses Monte Carlo simulations to investigate the MLE of the fixed effects Tobit model and its implications for marginal effects and asymptotic standard errors. The authors conduct Monte Carlo simulations to assess the fixed effects Tobit estimator and also evaluate probit and truncated regression models. The MLE of the fixed effects Tobit model behaves differently from binary choice models: location coefficients are immune to the incidental parameters problem, while finite‑sample bias appears in the disturbance variance rather than the slopes.
Abstract The maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) in nonlinear panel data models with fixed effects is widely understood (with a few exceptions) to be biased and inconsistent when T, the length of the panel, is small and fixed. However, there is surprisingly little theoretical or empirical evidence on the behavior of the estimator on which to base this conclusion. The received studies have focused almost exclusively on coefficient estimation in two binary choice models, the probit and logit models. In this note, we use Monte Carlo methods to examine the behavior of the MLE of the fixed effects tobit model. We find that the estimator's behavior is quite unlike that of the estimators of the binary choice models. Among our findings are that the location coefficients in the tobit model, unlike those in the probit and logit models, are unaffected by the “incidental parameters problem.” But, a surprising result related to the disturbance variance emerges instead – the finite sample bias appears here rather than in the slopes. This has implications for estimation of marginal effects and asymptotic standard errors, which are also examined in this paper. The effects are also examined for the probit and truncated regression models, extending the range of received results in the first of these beyond the widely cited biases in the coefficient estimators.
22
Linear Statistical Inference and Its Applications.
Craig Robertson, C. Mallikarjuna Rao · Biometrics · 1975 · 3.6K citations
Consistent Estimates Based on Partially Consistent Observations
Jerzy Neyman, Elizabeth L. Scott · Econometrica · 1948 · 2.7K citations
Analysis of Covariance with Qualitative Data
Gary Chamberlain · The Review of Economic Studies · 1980 · 2.7K citations