On the choice between sample selection and two-part models

被引:248
|
作者
Leung, SF
Yu, ST
机构
[1] HONG KONG UNIV SCI & TECHNOL,DEPT ECON,KOWLOON,HONG KONG
[2] NATL CHUNG CHENG UNIV,CHIAYI 621,TAIWAN
关键词
sample selection model; two-part model; censored regression model; collinearity; health economics; Monte Carlo simulation;
D O I
10.1016/0304-4076(94)01720-4
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
This paper resolves the vigorous debates between advocates of the sample selection model and the two-part model. Recent Monte Carlo studies by Hay, Leu, and Rohrer (1987) and Manning, Duan, and Rogers (1987) find that the two-part model performs better than the sample selection model even when the latter is the true model. We show that Manning, Duan, and Rogers' negative results regarding the sample selection model are caused by a critical design problem. We demonstrate that their data generating process produces serious collinearity problems that bias against the sample selection model. Once the design problem is rectified. the poor performance of the sample selection model evaporates. Our Monte Carlo results offer a more balanced view on the relative merits of the two models as each model performs well under different conditions. In particular, the sample selection model is susceptible to collinearity problems and a t-test can be used to distinguish between the two models as long as there are no collinearity problems. As an example, we employ Mroz's (1987) labor supply data to illustrate how his tests for selectivity bias might have been affected by collinearity problems.
引用
收藏
页码:197 / 229
页数:33
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Specification tests for the sample selection and two-part models
    Norton E.C.
    Dow W.H.
    Do Y.K.
    [J]. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology, 2008, 8 (4) : 201 - 208
  • [2] Two-part models are robust to endogenous selection
    Drukker, David M.
    [J]. ECONOMICS LETTERS, 2017, 152 : 71 - 72
  • [3] Sample selection versus two-part models revisited: The case of female smoking and drinking
    Madden, David
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2008, 27 (02) : 300 - 307
  • [4] Power and sample size requirements for two-part models
    Lachenbruch, PA
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2001, 20 (08) : 1235 - 1238
  • [5] Variable selection for random effects two-part models
    Han, Dongxiao
    Liu, Lei
    Su, Xiaogang
    Johnson, Bankole
    Sun, Liuquan
    [J]. STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2019, 28 (09) : 2697 - 2709
  • [6] twopm: Two-part models
    Belotti, Federico
    Deb, Partha
    Manning, Willard G.
    Norton, Edward C.
    [J]. STATA JOURNAL, 2015, 15 (01): : 3 - 20
  • [7] Interpreting the outcomes of two-part models
    Frondel, Manuel
    Vance, Colin James
    [J]. APPLIED ECONOMICS LETTERS, 2012, 19 (10) : 987 - 992
  • [8] MONTE-CARLO EVIDENCE ON THE CHOICE BETWEEN SAMPLE SELECTION AND 2-PART MODELS
    MANNING, WG
    DUAN, N
    ROGERS, WH
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ECONOMETRICS, 1987, 35 (01) : 59 - 82
  • [9] Two-Part Predictors in Regression Models
    Dziak, John J.
    Henry, Kimberly L.
    [J]. MULTIVARIATE BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH, 2017, 52 (05) : 551 - 561
  • [10] Comparisons of two-part models with competitors
    Lachenbruch, PA
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2001, 20 (08) : 1215 - 1234