one-way unbalanced random effect model
Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 7:37 am
I noticed that for the one-way unbalanced random effect model with the Swamy-Arora method, the results given by EViews 9.5 diverge from the values printed in text book of Baltagi (2013), table 9.1 (Hedonic housing data), e.g. the coefficient for variable 'crim' is -0.72 in the text book but -0.74 in EViews.
The data is commonly used in text book literature and examples, even in the EViews documentation for panel data here: http://www.eviews.com/help/helpintro.ht ... mples.html
But in this example, only the Wallace-Hussien method is used (which corresponds to the text book numbers), not Swamy-Arora.
EDIT
EViews replicates the numbers in table 2 of Baltagi/Chang (1994), column SA. Table 9.1 in the current text book of Baltagi (3rd+ editions) claims to be a copy of that table from the paper, but, in fact, it isn't an exakt copy because the numbers in column SA have been changed silently.
END EDIT
So, what is reason for the difference for the Swamy-Arora method?
Is it a bug in EViews? Wrong numbers in the text book? Please note: Stata seems to replicate Baltagi's figures as there is also example output of Stata in the text book
The data is commonly used in text book literature and examples, even in the EViews documentation for panel data here: http://www.eviews.com/help/helpintro.ht ... mples.html
But in this example, only the Wallace-Hussien method is used (which corresponds to the text book numbers), not Swamy-Arora.
EDIT
EViews replicates the numbers in table 2 of Baltagi/Chang (1994), column SA. Table 9.1 in the current text book of Baltagi (3rd+ editions) claims to be a copy of that table from the paper, but, in fact, it isn't an exakt copy because the numbers in column SA have been changed silently.
END EDIT
So, what is reason for the difference for the Swamy-Arora method?
Is it a bug in EViews? Wrong numbers in the text book? Please note: Stata seems to replicate Baltagi's figures as there is also example output of Stata in the text book