IT LAB: Assignment Session #8

Problem:

Perform Panel Data Analysis of "Produc" data

Solution:

There are three types of models:

      Pooled affect model
      Fixed affect model
      Random affect model

We will be determining which model is the best by using functions:
       pFtest : for determining between fixed and pooled
       plmtest : for determining between pooled and random
       phtest: for determining between random and fixed

The data can be loaded using the following command
data(Produc , package ="plm")
head(Produc)

Pooled Affect Model
 

pool <-plm( log(pcap) ~log(hwy)+ log(water)+ log(util) + log(pc) + log(gsp) + log(emp) + log(unemp), data=Produc,model=("pooling"),index =c("state","year"))
summary(pool)

  

Fixed Affect Model:

fixed<-plm( log(pcap) ~log(hwy)+ log(water)+ log(util) + log(pc) + log(gsp) + log(emp) + log(unemp), data=Produc,model=("within"),index =c("state","year"))

summary(fixed)

Random Affect Model:

random <-plm( log(pcap) ~log(hwy)+ log(water)+ log(util) + log(pc) + log(gsp) + log(emp) + log(unemp), data=Produc,model=("random"),index =c("state","year"))

> summary(random)

  

Testing of Model

This can be done through Hypothesis testing between the models as follows:

H0: Null Hypothesis: the individual index and time based params are all zero

H1: Alternate Hypothesis: atleast one of the index and time based params is non zero

Pooled vs Fixed

Null Hypothesis: Pooled Affect Model

Alternate Hypothesis : Fixed Affect Model

Command:

> pFtest(fixed,pool)

Result:

data:  log(pcap) ~ log(hwy) + log(water) + log(util) + log(pc) + log(gsp) + log(emp) + log(unemp)
F = 56.6361, df1 = 47, df2 = 761, p-value < 2.2e-16
alternative hypothesis: significant effects

Since the p value is negligible so we reject the Null Hypothesis and hence Alternate hypothesis is accepted which is to accept Fixed Affect Model.

Pooled vs Random

Null Hypothesis: Pooled Affect Model

Alternate Hypothesis: Random Affect Model

Command :

> plmtest(pool)

Result:

  Lagrange Multiplier Test - (Honda)

data:  log(pcap) ~ log(hwy) + log(water) + log(util) + log(pc) + log(gsp) + log(emp) + log(unemp)

normal = 57.1686, p-value < 2.2e-16
alternative hypothesis: significant effects

Since the p value is negligible so we reject the Null Hypothesis and hence Alternate hypothesis is accepted which is to accept Random Affect Model.

Random vs Fixed

Null Hypothesis: No Correlation . Random Affect Model

Alternate Hypothesis: Fixed Affect Model

Command:

 > phtest(fixed,random)

Result:

 Hausman Test

data:  log(pcap) ~ log(hwy) + log(water) + log(util) + log(pc) + log(gsp) + log(emp) + log(unemp)

chisq = 93.546, df = 7, p-value < 2.2e-16
alternative hypothesis: one model is inconsistent

Since the p value is negligible so we reject the Null Hypothesis and hence Alternate hypothesis is accepted which is to accept Fixed Affect Model.

Conclusion: 

So after making all the tests we come to the conclusion that Fixed Affect Model is best suited to do the panel data analysis for "Produc" data set.

Hence, we conclude that within the same id i.e. within same "state" there is no variation.