The name is absent



10


mhbounds

d

Coef.

Std. Err.

z

P>|z|

[95% Conf.

Interval]

age

.3316904

.1203295

2.76

0.006

.0958489

.5675318

age2

-.0063668

.0018554

-3.43

0.001

-.0100033

-.0027303

education

.8492683

.3477041

2.44

0.015

.1677807

1.530756

educ2

-.0506202

.0172492

-2.93

0.003

-.084428

-.0168124

married

-1.885542

.2993282

-6.30

0.000

-2.472214

-1.298869

black

1.135973

.3517793

3.23

0.001

.446498

1.825447

hispanic

1.96902

.5668567

3.47

0.001

.8580017

3.080039

re74

-.0001059

.0000353

-3.00

0.003

-.000175

-.0000368

re75

-.0002169

.0000414

-5.24

0.000

-.000298

-.0001357

re742

2.39e-09

6.43e-10

3.72

0.000

1.13e-09

3.65e-09

re752

1.36e-10

6.55e-10

0.21

0.836

-1.15e-09

1.42e-09

blacku74

2.144129

.4268089

5.02

0.000

1.307599

2.980659

_cons

-7.474742

2.443502

-3.06

0.002

-12.26392

-2.685566

Note: 22 failures and 0 successes completely determined.

There are observations with identical propensity score values.

The sort order of the data could affect your results.

Make sure that the sort order is random before calling psmatch2.

Γ

Sample

Treated

Controls

Difference

S.E.

Variable

>

T-stat

__________________L

employment

Γ

Unmatched

.756756757

.885140562

-.128383805

.024978843

>

-5.14

ATT I

.756756757

.664864865

.091891892

.047025406

>

1.95

I

Note: S.E. for ATT does not take into account that the propensity score is esti
> mated.

psmatch2:

Treatment
assignment

psmatch2:
Common

support
On suppor

Total

Untreated

2,490

2,490

Treated

185

185

Total

2,675

2,675

What can be seen from the output is that we get a significant positive treatment
effect on the treated of 0.0919. That is the employment rate of participants is 9.2%-
points higher when compared to matched control group members. Since
psmatch2
automatically produces the variables .treated, .weight, and .support we do not have
to specify those when using
mhbounds.

. mhbounds employment, gamma(1 (0.05) 1.5)

Mantel-Haenszel (1959) bounds for variable employment

Gamma         Q_mh+     Q_mh-     p_mh+     p_mh-

-------------------------------------------------
1        1.83216   1.83216   .033464   .033464

1.05        1.62209   2.04761   .052392   .020299



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. Shifting Identities and Blurring Boundaries: The Emergence of Third Space Professionals in UK Higher Education
3. Inhimillinen pääoma ja palkat Suomessa: Paluu perusmalliin
4. FISCAL CONSOLIDATION AND DECENTRALISATION: A TALE OF TWO TIERS
5. The Complexity Era in Economics
6. Gender and aquaculture: sharing the benefits equitably
7. THE RISE OF RURAL-TO-RURAL LABOR MARKETS IN CHINA
8. The name is absent
9. Secondary school teachers’ attitudes towards and beliefs about ability grouping
10. Bidding for Envy-Freeness: A Procedural Approach to n-Player Fair Division Problems
11. The name is absent
12. The name is absent
13. The name is absent
14. PROTECTING CONTRACT GROWERS OF BROILER CHICKEN INDUSTRY
15. Transfer from primary school to secondary school
16. The name is absent
17. Keynesian Dynamics and the Wage-Price Spiral:Estimating a Baseline Disequilibrium Approach
18. Wirkung einer Feiertagsbereinigung des Länderfinanzausgleichs: eine empirische Analyse des deutschen Finanzausgleichs
19. Handling the measurement error problem by means of panel data: Moment methods applied on firm data
20. Restructuring of industrial economies in countries in transition: Experience of Ukraine