E(u1 | X =
'
x, D = 1, P ( Z ) = p ) = P1
φ(α'Z∕ T
ʌ σεε J
P (Z )
J
(12)
E (u o| X = x, D = 0, P (Z ) = p ) = Po
φα'% 1
I /— J
1 - P (z )
I J
(13)
where ρ1 = —; ρ0 = — are the correlations between the disturbances of the respective
σε σε
outcome equations and the choice equation, and φ(.) denotes the standard normal density
function (Heckman, Urzua and Vytlacil, 2006b).
The probability of becoming legalized is defined as:
Pr(z) = Pr(D = 1∖Z = z) = Pr(α'Z > ε) = Φε{α'Z) (14)
where Φ(.)is the cumulative distribution ofε. Heckman, Urzua and Vytlacil (2006a) refer to
this function as a propensity score, taken as a monotonic function of the mean utility of treatment
(legal status). This is reflected in the acceptance decision:
D = 1[Φ εμ( Z ))> Φ ε(ε )]= 1[P (Z )> Ud ] (15)
where Ud denotes the unobserved characteristics of individuals. The algorithm estimates the
propensity score using a probit model, from which the predicted values for the treated and
untreated groups are used to define values over which the marginal treatment effect (MTE) of
legalization may be identified (Heckman, Urzua and Vytlacil, 2006b).
Since it is impossible to observe an individual in the treated and untreated states
simultaneously, the actual outcome to be estimated:
More intriguing information
1. Studying How E-Markets Evaluation Can Enhance Trust in Virtual Business Communities2. The name is absent
3. Migrating Football Players, Transfer Fees and Migration Controls
4. The name is absent
5. Special and Differential Treatment in the WTO Agricultural Negotiations
6. The Impact of Financial Openness on Economic Integration: Evidence from the Europe and the Cis
7. Who’s afraid of critical race theory in education? a reply to Mike Cole’s ‘The color-line and the class struggle’
8. On Dictatorship, Economic Development and Stability
9. ISSUES AND PROBLEMS OF IMMEDIATE CONCERN
10. THE CHANGING STRUCTURE OF AGRICULTURE