Regression (1) in Table 1 estimates the effect of additional educationby regressing ln (W age) on Exp, Exp2, W ks, Ed and all the dummyvariables listed above. Does the estimated regression suggest that additional years of schooling increases the wage? A wage equation is analysed in a balanced panel of 595 observations on headsof households. The sample data are drawn from years 1976-1982 of a surveyof income dynamic. The equation to be estimated isIn (Wage it)B₁ + B₂ Expit + B₂Exp²t + B₁Wksit + ß5Occit+B6Indit +B7Southit +P8SMS Ait + BgM Sit+B10Unionit + B11Femit + B12Edit + ß13 Blkit + Uit,where the variables are as follows:Exp...years of work experience,Wks...weeks worked,Occ...1 if blue-collar occupation, 0 if not,Ind...1 if the individual works in a manufacturing industry, 0 if not,South...1 if the individual resides in the south, 0 if not,SMSA...1 if the individual resides in a Standard MetropolitanStatistical Area (SMSA), 0 if not,MS...1 if the individual is married, 0 if not,Union...1 if the individual wage is set by a union contract, 0 if not,Fem...1 if the individual is female, 0 if not,Ed...years of education,Blk...1 if the individual is black, 0 if not.Note that variables Fem, Ed and Blk are time invariant (i.e. constant) inthe sample. The average number of years of experience in the sample is 19. Table 1: Results for estimating regression models for fatalities (standarderrors of the estimated coefficients in parentheses).RegressorExpExp²WksОссIndSouthSMSAMSUnionEdFemBlkIndividual EffectsTime EffectsR²(1)Regression Effects(2)(3)(3)0.0401(0.0042)0.00422(0.00152)-0.000673 -0.000418(0.000093)(0.000060)-0.140(0.027)0.0468(0.0230)-0.0557(0.0253)0.152(0.024)0.0484(0.0384)0.0926(0.0243)0.0567(0.0052)-0.368(0.049)-0.167(0.045)NoNo0.429(2)0.113(0.004)Fixed effectsFixed effectsYear effects0.000836(0.000685)-0.0215(0.0147)0.0192(0.0140)-0.0019(0.0413)-0.0425(0.0196)-0.0297(0.0150)0.0328(0.0198)IYesNo0.8910.112(0.00197)F statistic38.236.248.2-0.000398(0.0000595)0.000652(0.000684)-0.0192(0.0151)0.0206(0.0140)Table 2: Tests for joint significance of effects (null hypothesis: coefficientson effects are jointly zero).0.00314(0.0415)-0.0423(0.0189)-0.0284(0.0146)0.0299(0.0195)YesYes0.892p value<0.0001<0.0001<0.0001

Answered: Image /qna-images/answer/fd8fcd76-dce9-4f50-a2a2-1d1a263eadb8.jpg

errors of the estimated coefficients in parentheses). Regressor Exp Exp² Whe (1) els for 0.0401 (0.0042) (2) 0.113 (0.004) -0.000673 -0.000418 (0.000093) (0.000060) 0.00422 0.000836 (3) 0.112 (0.00197) -0.000398 (0.0000595) 0.000652

errors of the estimated coefficients in parentheses). Regressor Exp Exp² Whe (1) els for 0.0401 (0.0042) (2) 0.113 (0.004) -0.000673 -0.000418 (0.000093) (0.000060) 0.00422 0.000836 (3) 0.112 (0.00197) -0.000398 (0.0000595) 0.000652

MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications

6th Edition

ISBN:9781119256830

Author:Amos Gilat

Publisher:Amos Gilat

Chapter1: Starting With Matlab

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

What happened to the standard error of educ after adding KWW to the model? Discuss. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “If the log of the dependent variable appears in the regression, changing the unit of measurement of any independent variable affects both the slope and intercept coefficients”. Discuss by providing the resource.
A researcher interested in explaining the level of foreign reserves for the country of Barbadosestimated the following multiple regression model using yearly data spanning the period 2001 to 2016: ??=?+????+????+????Where FR = yearly foreign reserves ($000’s), OIL = annual oil prices, EXP = yearly total exports ($000’s) and FDI = annual foreign direct investment ($000’s). The sample of data was processed using MINITAB and the following is an extract of the output obtained:Predictor Coef StDev t-ratio p-value Constant 5491.38 2508.81 2.1888 0.0491OIL 85.39 18.46 4.626 0.0006EXP -377.08 112.19 * 0.0057FDI -396.99 160.66 -2.471 ** S = 2.45 R-sq = 96.3% R-sq(adj) = 95.3%Analysis of VarianceSource DF SS MS F pRegression 3 1991.31 663.77 ? ??Error 12 77.4 6.45Total 15 Perform the F Test making sure to state the null and alternative hypothesis. f) Given an interpretation of the term “R-sq” and comment on its value.
Question 38. You have performed a linear regression analysis to explore sunflowers' growth (in meters per month) depending on the watering (in litres per day). You have estimated the regression coefficient to be ß = 1.6. What can you conclude? a) There is a signifleant correlation between watering and growth. b) An average sunflower growths 1.6 meters per month. c) If you give it an additional litre of water per day, there will be an additional average growth of 1.6 meters per month. d) According to the model assumptions, an additional litre of water per day will result in additional 19.2 meters of growth after one year. e) You should consider further influencing quantities.
Describe three approaches to modeling seasonality in a regression forecast.