Not quite sure how to interpret this...

[stats321]

Hi,

When running the Redundant Fixed effects test, i get the following output:

Redundant Fixed Effects Tests
Equation: Untitled
Test cross-section and period fixed effects

Effects Test Statistic d.f. Prob.

Cross-section F 121.093217 (34,127) 0.0000
Cross-section Chi-square 649.186150 34 0.0000
Period F 4.852119 (18,127) 0.0000
Period Chi-square 96.823044 18 0.0000
Cross-Section/Period F 100.954858 (52,127) 0.0000
Cross-Section/Period Chi-square 692.942323 52 0.0000


The only examples I have come across so far have had some variation in p-values. I have tried to search the interent but I don't really know what this means and how to proceed?

My Hausman test showed me that I should use fixed effects if that is relevant?

Many thanks.

[stats321]

Sorry the formatting didn't come out how I would have liked it to. Basically, I get 0 p-values for all my redundant fixed effects tests. How do I interpret these?

Please help me! I have to give this in tomorrow and I don't know how to interpret these values

[EViews Glenn]

The cross-section fixed effects test tests the period/cross-section model against the period only.
The period fixed effects test test the period/cross-section model against the cross-section only.

0 p-vals indicates that both reject the null of period only and cross-section only respectively.

Given that you have those tests, the last test of period/cross-section against common intercept is not particularly interesting.

[stats321]

Thank you very much for your reply.

Based on the above results, am I ok to estimate using the fixed effects model with both time and cross section fixed? (I really hope so)

[EViews Glenn]

Your tests appear to show that both are relevant.