Improving a linear regression through joint estimation with a probit model

Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series D: The Statistician

Volumn 46, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 487-493

  Conniffe, Denis ^a  

^a ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Ireland)

Author keywords

Incomplete data; Probit model; Seemingly unrelated regressions

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347767630     PISSN: 00390526     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9884.00102     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Amari, S.-I. (1985) Differential Geometry in Statistics. New York: Springer.
2. Baker, T. J. (1968) The FII-ESRI joint industrial survey: a preliminary appraisal. In ESRI Quarterly Economic Commentary, Sept., pp. 25-32. Dublin: Economic and Social Research Institute.
3. Chesher, A. (1984) Improving the efficiency of probit estimators. Rev. Econ. Statist., 66, 523-527.
4. Conniffe, D. (1985) Estimating regression equations with common explanatory variables but unequal numbers of observations. J. Econometr., 27, 179-196.
5. _ (1995) Estimating equations with information loss on at least one dependent variable. Econ. Socl Rev., 27, 33-42.
6. Cox, D. R. and Hinkley, D. V. (1974) Theoretical Statistics. London: Chapman and Hall.
7. Hausman, J. A. (1978) Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica, 46, 1251-1271.
8. Heckman, J. (1979) Sample selection bias as specification error. Econometrica, 47, 153-161.
9. Rao, C. R. (1967) Least squares theory using an estimated dispersion matrix and its application to measurement of signals. In Proc. 5th Berkeley Symp. Mathematical Statistics and Probability, vol. 2, pp. 355-372. Berkeley: University of California Press.
10. Rubin, D. B. (1976) Inference and missing data. Biometrika, 63, 581-592.
11. Scott, S. (1985) The revised CII-ESRI survey - a note. In ESRJ Quarterly Economic Commentary, July, pp. 36-42. Dublin: Economic and Social Research Institute.
12. Zellner, A. (1962) An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregation bias. J. Am. Statist. Ass., 57, 348-368.