29 views

Uploaded by Amitabha Sinha

- Valuing Social Relationships 15.04
- Gretl Manual
- EX08.pdf
- STOCHASTIC FRONTIER.pdf
- Introduction from The Development of the Art Market in England
- EViews 7 Help
- Anatolyev-problemnik
- Probabilistic Analysis of Rock Slope Stability
- 1_SLR (1)
- rr220105-probability-and-statistics
- BeSimulationEconometrics.pdf
- Chapter 4 - Forecasting Solution Manual.doc
- meta
- Application of Panel Data to the Effect of Five (5) World Development Indicators (WDI) on GDP Per Capita of Twenty (20) African Union (AU) Countries (1981-2011)
- EViews5_1PanelPooledData
- Using Propensity Scores to Help Design Observational Studies: Application to the Tobacco Litigation
- Income and democracy-Acemoglu-Johnson-Robinson-Yared.pdf
- Evolutionary Analysis of Neighborhood Decline using Multilevel Selection Theory.pdf
- 89_Kuehl
- Slide Mancini Eco No Metrics EPFL2011

You are on page 1of 9

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR

DEPARTMENT OF A & A

ECONOMICS

TRIPURA UNIVERSITY

We note that in application of least squares principle; we

are in fact dealing with estimating average Y. This average

Y, we postulate that is decomposable into ‘a’, bX and ‘u’.

The so called disturbance term ‘u’ is nothing but the

random component of Y in the context of the population

we are theorizing about. The estimators of slope or

intercept follow the property of Y. Y follows the property

of ‘u’. What we assume about ‘u’, determines, so to say,

the sampling distribution properties of the estimators. Why

is it that what we assume about the population determine

the properties of estimators based on observed samples of

Y? The obvious answer is: we think that the sample is a

representative sample. As a result, we appeal to the

principle of analogy. To make this point more clear we can

first write down the population regression function (never

directly observable) and sample regression function based

on observed Y and X.

PRF: Yi=β0 + β1 Xi + ui …………………. (5)

SRF: Yi= β*0 + β1* Xi + ei ........................ (6)

Now, the OLS formula for β1* is

β1* = ΣxY = Σ x(β0+ β1 Xi +ui)

Σx2 Σx2

Formula By analogy Y is from PRF

the estimators, we are thinking that sample Y is same as

population Y which we never observe. The sampling

distribution properties of the estimators depend on the

distribution properties of the disturbance term u.

As a result, the assumptions of CLRM about u become

crucial in determining the sampling distributions of the

estimators. Not only that the stronger the assumptions, the

more attractive the properties of the estimators turn out to

be. Unfortunately, to the utter dismay of the researcher, the

stronger the assumptions the less realistic they may turn out

to be. Hence, the researcher is at the receiving end of the

two horns of dilemma. Try to make the estimators attractive

in terms of unbiasedness, low variance or linearity on Y,

testable in terms of confidence interval and so on, the

stricter the assumptions must be about ‘u’. But these

assumptions may take her away from the reality of

available data set. So, she likes to make the assumptions the

weakest. The ‘Occam’s Razor’ summarizes this dilemma.

In the context of EM, the regression model fulfills the

following three conditions:

(1) The expected value of ui given Xi is zero. Symbolically,

E (u i | X i) = 0

experiments? The answer is not far to seek. X denotes the

treatment level. Each subject is assigned into different

treatment level in a random manner. For a given level of Xi,

positive u and negative u have equal probability.

Consequently, the sum of the products pi*ui is zero, where

pi is the probability of ui. In short, E (ui|Xi) = 0.

(2) The covariance of Xi and ui is zero. Symbolically,

Cov(u i, X i) = 0

This is the direct consequence of randomization. The

subjects are assigned to different groups in a random

manner. So correlation is by definition zero.

There are certain sources of confusion here. The least

squares principle leads to two normal conditions /equations.

One is that Σei=0. The second condition is that ΣXiei=0.

These are mathematical first order conditions of

minimization of error squares sum. These conditions are

the restrictions imposed on the sample data by the least

squares principle. On the other hand, the two assumptions

mentioned above are assumptions about potentially

unobservable population.

Why is it then that we expect the sample estimators like

OLS (ordinary least squares ) to show certain desirable

properties like unbiasedness etc. when the disturbance term

of PRF fulfill conditions like the two mentioned above ? It

is due to the basic assumption that the sample is

representative of the population. Otherwise, least squares

principle cannot help at all. Let us imagine a hunter with a

gun which shoots straight, hits the target most of the time

and the stray bullets also do not stray very much. He is

requested to kill a man-eater tiger. But he goes to a jungle

of deadly serpents with no tiger. Will his gun help?

Similarly, OLS cannot help if the sample comes from a

‘wrong’ population.

Here the researcher must be cautious indeed. What will

help the researcher in selecting a representative sample?

First, a clear definition of the population is needed. Let us

say that the population consists of the married females in

the age group 18 to 35 years with at least one living child

.It will be less difficult to collect a sample in this case than

simply saying that all females define our population .Of

course much depends on the objectives of the study.

Second, method of data collection should not create any

errors. For example, females may understate their age.

Appropriate strategy of data collection has to be adopted

like looking at school leaving certificate or municipality

certificate. Sometimes, participatory learning methods like

focused group may help.

Third, the sample size should be sufficiently large, say,

more than 30.

The issues of random sampling can be addressed after

facing the problems mentioned above.

Let us assume that both the problems mentioned above,

namely, representative-ness and randomization are met.

What will be the consequences now for OLS estimators if

the two assumptions of CLRM are met?

We generally introduce the concept of ‘bias’ of the sample

based estimator to analyze the consequence. If we have for

the sample β1* and its population counterpart β1, then bias is

defined as follows:

Bias = E (β1*) - β1

Here, E represents the symbol for expected value, of

course. If bias is zero then regression model gives a proper

estimate of the effect of X on Y like EM.

Will the OLS estimators become unbiased if the two

assumptions mentioned above are met? The answer is, NO.

Unbiased- ness requires that the average of the sample

estimator is equal to the population estimator. Now we note

that

β1,OLS*= β1+ Σ(Xi – ¯X)ui …………………….(7)

Σ (Xi – ¯X)2

This expression can be easily derived by taking deviation

from the mean form of the regression equation and using

the result that the sum of deviation from mean for X is

zero. If we take expectations for both sides then the

numerator of the second expression on the right hand side

has E (ui). Now from the Law of Iterative Expectation, we

have the result

E(ui) = E{E(ui|Xi,X1,X2,…,XN)} .

For E(ui) to be zero ,which makes the estimator unbiased,

we require that (a) E(ui|Xi,) is independent from other Xs

like X1, X2 , X3 etc and (b) E(ui|Xi,)=0 for each X level

.This leads us to the third important assumption of the

CLRM.

(3) The disturbance terms are identically and independently

distributed (i.i.d). Conditions (a) and (b) imply this.

Randomization of course ensures the fulfillment of this

condition through assignment to experimental groups in a

random manner.

II.EXTENSIONS

A few concluding remarks before we wind up this lecture

(1) So far we have assumed a single regressor. But we can

have more than one explanatory variable. As a

consequence, we may have to ask the question, what is the

effect of X1 on Y, holding other variable constant? Multiple

regression is perfectly capable for answering such

questions. In fact it is designed to do precisely such

work .The coefficients of Xs measure these impacts. Do we

need additional assumption now? Yes. One assumption is

required. It is that the different explanatory variables are

not really the same variable in the sense that one can

derived from the other mathematically as a linear

transformation. Technically this is called absence of perfect

or deterministic multicollinearity. In this case, partial

impacts are not defined at all. Non linear relationships pose

no problem, however. Nor do imperfect or stochastic

multicollinearity.

(2) What about variance of the OLS estimators? If there is

same (homo) variation (scedasticity) for all disturbance

terms for each level of treatment then the OLS contains all

relevant information. It will have the minimum variance

among all linear and unbiased estimators. This is because

of two reasons. The OLS weights are perfectly correlated

(Σkixi=1) with the explanatory variables, i.e., Xs. Secondly,

the estimators are based on the principle of minimization of

variance of the disturbance term. This is the

homoscedasticity assumption required to establish the

Gauss-Markov Theorem.

(3) Time series econometrics requires further extensions.

- Valuing Social Relationships 15.04Uploaded byPaulo Viana
- Gretl ManualUploaded byarsalan1984
- EX08.pdfUploaded bySalman Farooq
- STOCHASTIC FRONTIER.pdfUploaded byMega Puspita
- Introduction from The Development of the Art Market in EnglandUploaded byPickering and Chatto
- EViews 7 HelpUploaded byJames James Carrieg
- Anatolyev-problemnikUploaded byJosé Miguel Carrasco
- Probabilistic Analysis of Rock Slope StabilityUploaded byBrian Conner
- 1_SLR (1)Uploaded byraf251
- rr220105-probability-and-statisticsUploaded bySRINIVASA RAO GANTA
- BeSimulationEconometrics.pdfUploaded byTHINH LY
- Chapter 4 - Forecasting Solution Manual.docUploaded byErica Uy
- metaUploaded bymphil.ramesh
- Application of Panel Data to the Effect of Five (5) World Development Indicators (WDI) on GDP Per Capita of Twenty (20) African Union (AU) Countries (1981-2011)Uploaded byAlexander Decker
- EViews5_1PanelPooledDataUploaded byGatahari Chandra
- Using Propensity Scores to Help Design Observational Studies: Application to the Tobacco LitigationUploaded byeifer4
- Income and democracy-Acemoglu-Johnson-Robinson-Yared.pdfUploaded byMiguel E. Purroy
- Evolutionary Analysis of Neighborhood Decline using Multilevel Selection Theory.pdfUploaded byYvonne Yap Ying Ying
- 89_KuehlUploaded byEdo Cre
- Slide Mancini Eco No Metrics EPFL2011Uploaded byzcahfm8
- 173232298 a Guide to Modern Econometrics by Verbeek 71 80Uploaded byAnonymous T2LhplU
- PedroniUploaded byjamel
- 2016-Analysing Firm-level Price Effects for Differentiated Products- The Case of Australian Wine Produ.pdfUploaded byRodrigo Alejandro Romo Muñoz
- 1607Uploaded byAlexandra Tuchilus
- 59132043Uploaded byAna Maria Inostroza Garces
- 130729_AtlasPNUD_2013Uploaded byThalita Borges
- sol05.pdfUploaded byspitzersglare
- 67Uploaded byvasece4537577
- SPSSUploaded byံံံံ ံံံံ
- BAB 3 paired-t-testUploaded byNora Hafizan

- Higher EducationUploaded byAmitabha Sinha
- Satyendra DissertationUploaded byAmitabha Sinha
- Biodiversity and Economic DevelopmentUploaded byAmitabha Sinha
- institutional economicsUploaded byAmitabha Sinha
- TribalUploaded byAmitabha Sinha
- Paper NirdUploaded byAmitabha Sinha
- Economics ResearchUploaded byAmitabha Sinha
- agriculture tripura indiaUploaded byAmitabha Sinha

- Trend filtering methods.pdfUploaded byniranjannlg
- T2 Hotelling PadaUploaded byfaiq
- Panel Data Method-BaltagiUploaded byUmbaranWisnu
- Non-Parametric Power Spectrum Estimation MethodsUploaded bystartech
- Summary EconometricsUploaded byFatimah Ahmad
- r Lecture 10Uploaded byDanish Aslam
- MATH321-F08-LEC2-Solutions----Chapter-8.docUploaded bycatty8
- Asparouhov y Muthen Multiple Imputation.pdfUploaded byAntonio Pineda Dominguez
- Meta-Analysis of PrevalenceUploaded byamarillonoexpecta
- Econ321Ch04Uploaded byjonykhan
- Golden Ratio 1Uploaded byChase Comfort
- MB0040 Statistics for Management Sem 1 Aug Spring AssignmentUploaded byNeelam Aswal
- fgls.pdfUploaded byArdelia Luthfiyah
- Plackett-Burnam (Hadamard Matrix) Designs for ScreeningUploaded bywilliamsa01
- Kauda Game_A Case StudyUploaded byginish12
- Identification of Short Transmission-Line Parameters from Synchrophasor MeasurementsUploaded byAbdulrahman Aldeek
- Asymptotic Theory for OLSUploaded bySegah Meer
- ch18Uploaded byceice2013
- Solutions to Exercises-AlpaydinUploaded bymrgrizzley
- SPE-173214-MSUploaded byDavid Montoya
- Sociological Methods & Research 2011 O Brien 419 52Uploaded byJake Daedalus
- A Comparative Test of Phylogenetic Diversity IndicesUploaded byVinicius
- Mle VarianceUploaded byVikram Kamath
- On the Problem of Calibration G.K. Shukla TechnometricsUploaded bymilos
- 1. Detecting Earning ManagementUploaded byAlmizan Abadi
- STATISTICAL PARADISES AND PARADOXES IN BIG DATA (I): LAW OF LARGE POPULATIONS, BIG DATA PARADOX, AND THE 2016 US PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONUploaded byjohn3963
- Pauszek & Gibson (2016) High Spatial Validity is Not Sufficient to Elicit Voluntary Shifts of AttentionUploaded byPenny Dou
- A Bayesian Framework for Combining Valuation EstimatesUploaded byEvaUnibo
- Accounting for Common Method Variance in Cross-Sectional Research DesignsUploaded byirfan444
- E177Uploaded byAngel Carranza