Nonresponse in panel data: The impact on estimates of a life cycle consumption function
面板数据中的未回应:对生命周期消费函数估计的影响AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要以消费面板的未回应、样本流失及平衡与非平衡面板估计为核心。
面板数据中的未回应:对生命周期消费函数估计的影响AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Abstract If missing observations in a panel data set are not missing at random, many widely applied estimators may be inconsistent. In this paper we examine empirically several ways to reveal the nature and severity of the selectivity problem due to nonresponse, as well as a number of methods to estimate the resulting models. Using a life cycle consumption function and data from the Expenditure Index Panel from the Netherlands, we discuss simple procedures that can be used to assess whether observations are missing at random, and we consider more complicated estimation procedures that can be used to obtain consistent or efficient estimates in case of selectivity of attrition bias. Finally, some attention is paid to the differences in identification, consistency, and efficiency between inferences from a single wave of the panel, a balanced sub‐panel, and an unbalanced panel.