Table 3:
Simulation results for different choices of d(j)(X(j)) and comparisons to Gu et al. (2019) based on 1000 replications. The proposed method here is Method 2 without using working models.
| n = 400 | n = 1000 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| βc | β X 1 | β X 2 | βZ | β X 2 Z | βc | β X 1 | β X 2 | βZ | β X 2 Z | ||
| MLE | bias | 0.010 | −0.005 | −0.013 | 0.006 | 0.016 | 0.006 | −0.006 | −0.003 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| emp | 0.122 | 0.136 | 0.144 | 0.140 | 0.139 | 0.076 | 0.084 | 0.087 | 0.083 | 0.085 | |
| GTCM-1 | bias | 0.036 | 0.015 | 0.008 | 0.044 | −0.087 | 0.040 | 0.009 | 0.013 | 0.047 | −0.093 |
| emp | 0.059 | 0.081 | 0.138 | 0.134 | 0.096 | 0.037 | 0.049 | 0.084 | 0.082 | 0.060 | |
| EL2-1-1 | bias | −0.000 | 0.018 | −0.013 | 0.006 | 0.016 | 0.007 | 0.009 | −0.003 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| emp | 0.052 | 0.076 | 0.144 | 0.140 | 0.139 | 0.033 | 0.045 | 0.087 | 0.083 | 0.085 | |
| EL2-1-2 | bias | −0.000 | 0.018 | −0.013 | 0.006 | 0.016 | 0.007 | 0.009 | −0.002 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| emp | 0.050 | 0.075 | 0.144 | 0.141 | 0.130 | 0.031 | 0.044 | 0.087 | 0.084 | 0.078 | |
| GTCM-2 | bias | 0.028 | −0.017 | 0.087 | 0.044 | −0.089 | 0.032 | −0.016 | 0.098 | 0.048 | −0.093 |
| emp | 0.054 | 0.071 | 0.076 | 0.133 | 0.095 | 0.035 | 0.042 | 0.047 | 0.081 | 0.060 | |
| EL2-2-1 | bias | 0.000 | 0.019 | −0.033 | 0.006 | 0.015 | 0.006 | 0.018 | −0.012 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| emp | 0.048 | 0.065 | 0.062 | 0.141 | 0.138 | 0.030 | 0.037 | 0.035 | 0.083 | 0.085 | |
| EL2-2-2 | bias | −0.009 | 0.011 | −0.034 | 0.008 | 0.049 | −0.002 | 0.011 | −0.013 | 0.008 | 0.028 |
| emp | 0.042 | 0.060 | 0.062 | 0.141 | 0.104 | 0.026 | 0.034 | 0.036 | 0.084 | 0.061 | |
| EL2-2-3 | bias | −0.010 | 0.011 | −0.034 | 0.008 | 0.051 | −0.002 | 0.011 | −0.013 | 0.009 | 0.029 |
| emp | 0.042 | 0.060 | 0.062 | 0.142 | 0.104 | 0.026 | 0.034 | 0.036 | 0.084 | 0.061 | |
| GTCM-3 | bias | 0.031 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.044 | −0.087 | 0.034 | −0.001 | 0.018 | 0.047 | −0.093 |
| emp | 0.064 | 0.081 | 0.081 | 0.134 | 0.095 | 0.041 | 0.049 | 0.049 | 0.082 | 0.060 | |
| EL2-3-1 | bias | −0.005 | 0.000 | −0.012 | 0.006 | 0.014 | 0.000 | −0.003 | 0.007 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| emp | 0.059 | 0.076 | 0.075 | 0.140 | 0.139 | 0.039 | 0.044 | 0.045 | 0.083 | 0.085 | |
| EL2-3-2 | bias | −0.008 | −0.001 | −0.013 | 0.006 | 0.024 | −0.002 | −0.006 | 0.005 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| emp | 0.057 | 0.073 | 0.073 | 0.140 | 0.114 | 0.036 | 0.043 | 0.044 | 0.083 | 0.069 | |
| EL2-3-3 | bias | −0.010 | −0.001 | −0.017 | 0.008 | 0.032 | 0.000 | −0.008 | 0.012 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| emp | 0.057 | 0.073 | 0.070 | 0.140 | 0.111 | 0.036 | 0.043 | 0.040 | 0.084 | 0.068 | |
emp: empirical standard error. GTCM-1,2 or 3: the method in Gu et al. (2019) using Calculator 1, 2, or 3, respectively. EL2-j-1,2 or 3: the proposed Method 2 without working models using Calculator j and different specifications of d(j)(X(j)).