Implementing weak-instrument robust tests for a general class of instrumental-variables models

Stata Journal

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 398-421

  Finlay, Keith ^a   Magnusson, Leandro M ^a  

^a TULANE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Condivreg; Confidence intervals; Endogenous probit; Endogenous tobit; Hypothesis testing; Ivprobit; Ivreg2; Ivregress; Ivtobit; Rivtest; St0171; Two stage least squares; Weak instruments

Indexed keywords

EID: 70349606591     PISSN: 1536867X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1536867x0900900304     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Anderson, T. W., and H. Rubin. 1949. Estimation of the parameters of a single equation in a complete system of stochastic equations. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 20: 46-63.
2. Andrews, D. W. K., M. J. Moreira, and J. H. Stock. 2007. Performance of conditional Wald tests in IV regression with weak instruments. Journal of Econometrics 139: 116-132.
3. Baum, C. F., M. E. Schaffer, and S. Stillman. 2007. Enhanced routines for instrumental variables/generalized method of moments estimation and testing. Stata Journal 7: 465-506.
4. Cameron, A. C., J. B. Gelbach, and D. L. Miller. 2008. Bootstrap-based improvements for inference with clustered errors. Review of Economics and Statistics 90: 414-427.
5. Chernozhukov, V., and C. Hansen. 2008. The reduced form: A simple approach to inference with weak instruments. Economics Letters 100: 68-71.
6. Dufour, J.-M. 2003. Identification, weak instruments and statistical inference in econometrics. Working Paper 2003s-49, Scientific Series, CIRANO. http://www.cirano.qc.ca/pdf/publication/2003s-49.pdf.
7. Hansen, L. P., J. Heaton, and A. Yaron. 1996. Finite-sample properties of some alternative GMM estimators. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 14: 262-280. (Pubitemid 126089046)
8. Kleibergen, F. 2007. Generalizing weak instrument robust IV statistics towards multiple parameters, unrestricted covariance matrices and identification statistics. Journal of Econometrics 139: 181-216. (Pubitemid 46754622)
9. Magnusson, L. M. 2008a. Inference in limited dependent variable models robust to weak identification. Working Paper 0801, Department of Economics, Tulane University. http://ideas.repec.org/p/tul/wpaper/0801.html.
10. -2008b. Tests in censored models when the structural parameters are not identified. Working Paper 0802, Department of Economics, Tulane University. http://ideas.repec.org/p/tul/wpaper/0802.html.
11. Mikusheva, A. 2005. Robust confidence sets in the presence of weak instruments. Working Paper No. 07-27, Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1021366.
12. Mikusheva, A., and B. P. Poi. 2006. Tests and confidence sets with correct size when instruments are potentially weak. Stata Journal 6: 335-347. (Pubitemid 44505050)
13. Moreira, M. J. 2003. A conditional likelihood ratio test for structural models. Econometrica 71: 1027-1048.
14. Moreira, M. J., and B. P. Poi. 2003. Implementing tests with correct size in the simultaneous equations model. Stata Journal 3: 57-70.
15. Mroz, T. A. 1987. The sensitivity of an empirical model of married women's hours of work to economic and statistical assumptions. Econometrica 55: 765-799.
16. Stock, J. H., J. H. Wright, and M. Yogo. 2002. A survey of weak instruments and weak identification in generalized method of moments. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 20: 518-529.