Empirical exercise utilizing excel spreadsheets.Ã‚Â Attached is all information including assignment and data

In the empirical exercises on earnings and height in Chapter 4 and 5, you estimated a relatively large and statistically significant effect of a worker's height on his or her earnings. One explanation for this result is omitted variable bias. Height is correlated with an omitted factor that affects earnings. For example, Case and Paxson (2008) suggests that cognitive ability (or intelligence) is the omitted factor. The mechanism they describe is straight forward: Poor nutrition and other harmful environmental factors in utero and in early childhood have, on average, deleterious effects on both cognitive and physical development. Cognitive ability affects earnings later in life and thus is an omitted variable in the regression. a. suppose the mechanism described above is correct. Explan how this leads to omitted variable bias in the OLS regression of Earnings o Height. Does this bias lead the estimated slope to be too large or too small? If the mechanism described above is correct, the estimated effect of height on earnings should disappear if a variable measuring cognitive ability is included in the regression. Unfortunately, there isnt a director measure of cognitive ability in the data set, but the data set does include "years of education" for each individual. Because students with higher cognitive ability are more likely to attend school longer, years of education might serve as a control variable for cognitive ability, in this case including education in the regression will eliminate, or at least attenuate, the omitted variable bias problem. Use the years of education variable (educ) to construct four indicator variables for whether a worker has less than a high school diploma (LT_HS=1 if educ < 12, 0 otherwise), a high school diploma (HS=1 if educ=12,0 otherwise) or a bachelors degree or higher (College =1 if educ greater than or equal to 16, 0 otherwise). b. focusing on women only, run a regression of (1) earnings on height and (2) earnings on height, including LT_HS, HS, and Some_Col as control variables. i. Compare the estimated coefficient on Height in regressions (1) and (2). Is there a large change in the coefficient? Has it changed in a way consistent with the cognitive ability explanation? ii. the regression omits the control variable College. Why? iii. test the joint null hypothesis that the coefficients on the education variables are equal to zero. iv. discuss the values of the estimated coefficients on LT_HS, HS, and Some_Col. (each estimated coefficient is negative, and the coefficient on LT_HS is more negative than the coefficient on HS< which in turn is more negative than the coefficient on Some_Col. Why? What do the coefficients measure? c. Repeat (b) using data for men.Subject | Mathematics |

Due By (Pacific Time) | 05/13/2015 08:00 am |

Tutor | Rating |
---|---|

pallavi Chat Now! |
out of 1971 reviews More.. |

amosmm Chat Now! |
out of 766 reviews More.. |

PhyzKyd Chat Now! |
out of 1164 reviews More.. |

rajdeep77 Chat Now! |
out of 721 reviews More.. |

sctys Chat Now! |
out of 1600 reviews More.. |

sharadgreen Chat Now! |
out of 770 reviews More.. |

topnotcher Chat Now! |
out of 766 reviews More.. |

XXXIAO Chat Now! |
out of 680 reviews More.. |