Question: (i) Using the data in INJURY.RAW for Kentucky, the estimated equation when afchnge is dropped from (13.12) is Is it surprising that the estimate on

(i) Using the data in INJURY.RAW for Kentucky, the estimated equation when afchnge is dropped from (13.12) is

(i) Using the data in INJURY.RAW for Kentucky, the estimated

Is it surprising that the estimate on the interaction is fairly close to that in (13.12)? Explain.
(ii) When afchnge is included but highearn is dropped, the result is

(i) Using the data in INJURY.RAW for Kentucky, the estimated

Why is the coefficient on the interaction term now so much larger than in (13.12)? [In equation (13.10), what is the assumption being made about the treatment and control groups if (1 = 0?]

logdurat) 1.129 253 highearn 198 afehnge highearm (0.022) 042) n 5,626, R 02 (.052) log(duran = 1.233-.100 afchnge + .447 afchnge-highearn (0.023) 040) n = 5.626, R2 = .016. .050)

Step by Step Solution

3.46 Rating (156 Votes )

There are 3 Steps involved in it

1 Expert Approved Answer
Step: 1 Unlock

i ii It is not surprising that the coefficient on the interaction term changes little whe... View full answer

blur-text-image
Question Has Been Solved by an Expert!

Get step-by-step solutions from verified subject matter experts

Step: 2 Unlock
Step: 3 Unlock

Document Format (1 attachment)

Word file Icon

839-M-E-E-A (721).docx

120 KBs Word File

Students Have Also Explored These Related Econometric Questions!