楼主: allychina
26585 19

[学科前沿] 请问panel data的固定效应模型与随机效应模型有什么不同。 [推广有奖]

  • 1关注
  • 0粉丝

本科生

93%

还不是VIP/贵宾

-

威望
0
论坛币
7389 个
通用积分
1.4100
学术水平
0 点
热心指数
0 点
信用等级
0 点
经验
1101 点
帖子
70
精华
0
在线时间
108 小时
注册时间
2005-6-15
最后登录
2023-12-5

+2 论坛币
k人 参与回答

经管之家送您一份

应届毕业生专属福利!

求职就业群
赵安豆老师微信:zhaoandou666

经管之家联合CDA

送您一个全额奖学金名额~ !

感谢您参与论坛问题回答

经管之家送您两个论坛币!

+2 论坛币
<P>请问panel data的固定效应模型与随机效应模型有什么不同。</P>
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

关键词:panel data 随机效应模型 固定效应模型 Panel 固定效应 模型

回帖推荐

hgz2373294 发表于2楼  查看完整内容

主要是误差项的组成不同导致的.详细的可以看以下书: 1林光平>计算计量经济学>面板的相关章节 2伍德里奇>计量经济学导论>面板那章 3格林:经济计量分析中文版相关章节 [此贴子已经被作者于2005-8-1 11:18:43编辑过]

本帖被以下文库推荐

沙发
hgz2373294 发表于 2005-7-7 00:15:00 |只看作者 |坛友微信交流群

主要是误差项的组成不同导致的.详细的可以看以下书:

1林光平>计算计量经济学>面板的相关章节

2伍德里奇>计量经济学导论>面板那章

3格林:经济计量分析中文版相关章节

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-8-1 11:18:43编辑过]

已有 1 人评分经验 论坛币 收起 理由
胖胖小龟宝 + 10 + 10 热心帮助其他会员

总评分: 经验 + 10  论坛币 + 10   查看全部评分

大数据晓(小)众商!

使用道具

藤椅
jinyuguo 发表于 2005-7-19 11:42:00 |只看作者 |坛友微信交流群

假定不同,所以使用的估计方法不同也。但大多数情况下结果差异不大(根据自己的经验,但没有严格依据)。

使用道具

板凳
zhaosweden 发表于 2005-7-31 22:10:00 |只看作者 |坛友微信交流群

Some intuitions can be found here:

==============================

Fixed and Random Effects

Central to the idea of variance components models is the idea of fixed and random effects. Each effect in a variance components model must be classified as either a fixed or a random effect. Fixed effects arise when the levels of an effect constitute the entire population about which you are interested. For example, if a plant scientist is comparing the yields of three varieties of soybeans, then Variety would be a fixed effect, providing that the scientist was concerned about making inferences on only these three varieties of soybeans. Similarly, if an industrial experiment focused on the effectiveness of two brands of a machine, Machine would be a fixed effect only if the experimenter's interest did not go beyond the two machine brands.

On the other hand, an effect is classified as a random effect when you want to make inferences on an entire population, and the levels in your experiment represent only a sample from that population. Psychologists comparing test results between different groups of subjects would consider Subject as a random effect. Depending on the psychologists' particular interest, the Group effect might be either fixed or random. For example, if the groups are based on the sex of the subject, then Sex would be a fixed effect. But if the psychologists are interested in the variability in test scores due to different teachers, then they might choose a random sample of teachers as being representative of the total population of teachers, and Teacher would be a random effect. Note that, in the soybean example presented earlier, if the scientists are interested in making inferences on the entire population of soybean varieties and randomly choose three varieties for testing, then Variety would be a random effect.

If all the effects in a model (except for the intercept) are considered random effects, then the model is called a random effects model; likewise, a model with only fixed effects is called a fixed-effects model. The more common case, where some factors are fixed and others are random, is called a mixed model. In PROC VARCOMP, by default, effects are assumed to be random. You specify which effects are fixed by using the FIXED= option in the MODEL statement. In general, if an interaction or nested effect contains any effect that is random, then the interaction or nested effect should be considered as a random effect as well.

In the linear model, each level of a fixed effect contributes a fixed amount to the expected value of the dependent variable. What makes a random effect different is that each level of a random effect contributes an amount that is viewed as a sample from a population of normally distributed variables, each with mean 0, and an unknown variance, much like the usual random error term that is a part of all linear models. The estimate of the variance associated with the random effect is known as the variance component because it is measuring the part of the overall variance contributed by that effect. Thus, PROC VARCOMP estimates the variance of the random variables that are associated with the random effects in your model, and the variance components tell you how much each of the random factors contributes to the overall variability in the dependent variable.

使用道具

报纸
zhaosweden 发表于 2005-7-31 22:41:00 |只看作者 |坛友微信交流群

使用道具

地板
theta 发表于 2005-8-1 10:15:00 |只看作者 |坛友微信交流群

to 2 楼:

你说的是下面这篇文章么:

市场竞争导致的银行集中与效率:基于面板数据分析 现代管理科学 2005 02

可是你里面对模型的选择是错误的,因为Hausman检验拒绝了原假设,也就是说随机干扰项与解释变量相关,此时随机效应模型是有偏的。这种情况下你可以继续使用随机效应模型,但是要采用工具变量;或者采用固定效应模型。但是你文中却在拒绝原假设的情况下得出随机效应更好的结论,这显然是有问题的。

使用道具

7
hgz2373294 发表于 2005-8-1 10:59:00 |只看作者 |坛友微信交流群

to theta

请你参考一下;计算计量经济学——计量经济学家和金融分析师GAUSS编程与应用 林光平 P293

感觉你好象说反了.随机模型就是假定误差项与回归量是不相关.参见:经济计量分析,格林P522

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-8-1 11:11:46编辑过]

大数据晓(小)众商!

使用道具

8
旺财来福 发表于 2005-8-1 11:28:00 |只看作者 |坛友微信交流群

挑挑楼上的毛病,FE&RE实际上都假设误差项u和解释变量不相关,但RE同时假定未观测效应c与解释变量不相关。

我相信你肯定知道这意思,一时手痒痒。

欢迎大家访问社科院研究生院论坛 www.huajiadi.net

使用道具

9
theta 发表于 2005-8-1 13:21:00 |只看作者 |坛友微信交流群

其实二位说的是一个意思,因为随机效应模型的设定中将未观测效应(个体效应,用ui表示)和真正的随机干扰项共同视为干扰项的组成部分,所以又称为“误差成分模型”。

我说hgz。。。的文章------市场竞争导致的银行集中与效率:基于面板数据分析 现代管理科学 2005 02

中的问题在于FE和RE模型的筛选。因为Hausman检验拒绝原假设表明,cov(ui,x)=0 的原假设被拒绝了,这种情况下,使用RE的前提假设无法满足。所以你在文章中既然拒绝了Hausman检验,就不能得出 使用RE模型较好 的结论。

不知我的意思是否表达清楚了。

使用道具

10
msryun 发表于 2008-4-15 22:21:00 |只看作者 |坛友微信交流群
Hausman检验会不会在什么情况下出现失效呢

使用道具

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 我要注册

本版微信群
加好友,备注jltj
拉您入交流群

京ICP备16021002-2号 京B2-20170662号 京公网安备 11010802022788号 论坛法律顾问:王进律师 知识产权保护声明   免责及隐私声明

GMT+8, 2024-5-1 02:48