Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-jwnkl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T02:54:44.009Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Estimating Linear Probability Functions: A Comparison of Approaches

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

David L. Debertin ,
Angelos Pagoulatos  and
Eldon D. Smith
David L. Debertin
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Kentucky
Angelos Pagoulatos
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Kentucky
Eldon D. Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Kentucky
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A linear probability function permits the estimation of the probability of the occurrence or non-occurrence of a discrete event. Nerlove and Press (p. 3–9) outline several statistical problems that arise if such a function is estimated via OLS. In particular, heteroskedasticity inherent in such a regression model leads to inefficient estimates of parameters (Amemiya 1973, Horn and Horn). Moreover, without restrictions on the conventional OLS model, probability estimates lying outside the unit (0–1) interval are possible (Nerlove and Press). Goldberger and Kmenta suggest two approaches for alleviating the heteroskedasticity problems inherent in the OLS regression model. Logit analysis will also alleviate heteroskedasticity problems and ensure that estimated probabilities will lie within the unit interval (Amemiya 1974, Hauck and Donner, Hill and Kau, Horn and Horn, Horn, Horn, and Duncan, Theil 1970).

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , December 1980 , pp. 65 - 69
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amemiya, Takeshi. “Bivariate Probit Analysis, Minimum Chi Square Methods.” J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 69(1974):940–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amemiya, Takeshi. ”Regression Analysis When the Dependent Variable is Truncated Normal.” Econometrica 41(1973):997–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batie, Sandra. “Discussion: Location Determinants of Manufacturing Industry in Rural Areas.” S. J. Agr. Econ. 10(1978):33–7.Google Scholar
Berkson, G. “Maximum Liklihood and Minimum Chi Square Estimates of the Logistic Function.” M. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 50(1955):130–61.Google Scholar
Eeron, Bradley. “The Efficiency of Logistic Regression Compared to Normal Discriminant Analysis.” J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 70(1975):892–8.Google Scholar
Goldberger, Arthur. Econometric Theory. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1964.Google Scholar
Gujariti, Damodar. Basic Econometrics. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1978.Google Scholar
Hauck, Walter W. Jr. and Donner, Allan. “Wald’s Test as Applied to Hypothesis on Logit Analysis.” J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 72(1977):851–3.Google Scholar
Hill, Lowell, and Kau, Paul. “Application of Multi-variate Probit to a Threshold Model of Grain Dryer Purchasing Decisions.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 55(1973):19–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, Susan and Horn, Roger A.. “Comparison of Estimators of Heteroskedastic Variances in Linear Models.” J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 70(1975):872–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, Susan D., Horn, Roger A., and Duncan, David B.. “Estimating Heteroskedastic Variances in Linear Models.” J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 70(1975):380–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, G.Econometric Methods. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1972.Google Scholar
Kmenta, Jan. Elements of Econometrics. New York: Macmillan Company, 1971.Google Scholar
Li, Mingche M. “A Logit Model of Homeownership.” Econometrica 45(1977):1081-95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFadden, Daniel. “Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior,” in Frontiers in Econometrics, Paul Zarembka, editor. New York:Academic Press, 1974,105-42.Google Scholar
McFadden, Daniel. “Quantal Choice Analysis: A Survey.” Ann. Econ. and Soc. Meas. 5(1976):363–90.Google Scholar
Nerlove, Marc and James, S. Press. “Univariate and Multivariate Log Linear and Logistic Models.” Rand Corp. Rept. R-1306-EDA/NIH 1973.Google Scholar
Penn, J. B. “On Probits, Logits and Tobits: A Description and Discussion of Applications to Economics.”Purdue University, 1971.Google Scholar
Sanathanan, Lilitha. “Some Properties of the Logistic Model for Dichotomous Response.” J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 69(1974):744–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Eldon, Deaton, Brady, and Kelch, David. “Location Determinants of Manufacturing Industry in Rural Areas.” S. J. Agr. Econ. 10(1978):23–32.Google Scholar
Theil, Henri. “On the Estimation of Relationships Involving Qualitative Variables.” Amer. J. Soc. 76(1970):103–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theil, Henri. Principles of Econometrics. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1971.Google Scholar
Witherington, Moffat Patrick and Wills, Cleave E.. “The Dichotomous Dependent Variable: A Comparison of Probit Analysis and Ordinary Least Squares Procedures by Monte Carlo Analysis.” Res. Bull. 657, University of Massachusetts, College of Food and Natural Resources, 1978.Google Scholar