A couple people pointed me to this recent econometrics paper, which begins:
In the single IV model, current practice relies on the first-stage F exceed- ing some threshold (e.g., 10) as a criterion for trusting t-ratio inferences, even though this yields an anti-conservative test. We show that a true 5 percent test instead requires an F greater than 104.7. Maintaining 10 as a threshold requires replacing the critical value 1.96 with 3.43. We re-examine 57 AER papers and find that corrected inference causes half of the initially presumed statistically significant results to be insignificant. We introduce a more powerful test, the tF procedure, which provides F-dependent adjusted t-ratio critical values.
I don’t like this sort of thing as it seems to be focusing on binary decisions in a way that seems inappropriate to me. To me, this sort of paper is the rough equivalent of some sort of Talmudic argument about whether God can dig a ditch so wide he can’t jump across it. I just don’t buy into the premise so it’s hard for me to go further. But maybe the paper is useful for people who work within that framework.
from Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science https://ift.tt/3e0oHIq
via IFTTT
Comments
Post a Comment