Sample Selection Versus Two-Part Models Revisited - The Case of Female Smoking and Drinking
AbstractThere is a well-established debate between Heckman sample selection and two-part models in health econometrics, particularly when no obvious exclusion restrictions are available. Most of this debate has focussed on the application of these models to health care expenditure. This paper revisits the debate in the context of female smoking and drinking, and evaluates the two approaches on three grounds - theoretical, practical and statistical. The two-part model is generally favoured but it is stressed that this comparison should be carried out on a case-by-case basis.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by School Of Economics, University College Dublin in its series Working Papers with number 200604.
Length: 31 pages
Date of creation: 08 Mar 2006
Date of revision:
Selection; Two-part; Smoking; Drinking;
Other versions of this item:
- Madden, David, 2008. "Sample selection versus two-part models revisited: The case of female smoking and drinking," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 300-307, March.
- Madden, David, 2006. "Sample Selection Versus Two-Part Models Revisited: The Case of Female Smoking and Drinking," Papers HRBWP23, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
- David Madden, 2006. "Sample Selection Versus Two-Part Models Revisited: the Case of Female Smoking and Drinking," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 06/12, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
- I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Production
- D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
- C24 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Truncated and Censored Models; Switching Regression Models
- C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Duan, Naihua, et al, 1983. "A Comparison of Alternative Models for the Demand for Medical Care," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 1(2), pages 115-26, April.
- Willard G. Manning Jr. & Charles E. Phelps, 1979. "The Demand for Dental Care," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(2), pages 503-525, Autumn.
- Heckman, James J, 1979.
"Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error,"
Econometric Society, vol. 47(1), pages 153-61, January.
- James J. Heckman, 1976. "The Common Structure of Statistical Models of Truncation, Sample Selection and Limited Dependent Variables and a Simple Estimator for Such Models," NBER Chapters, in: Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, Volume 5, number 4, pages 475-492 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Cragg, John G, 1971. "Some Statistical Models for Limited Dependent Variables with Application to the Demand for Durable Goods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 39(5), pages 829-44, September.
- Christian Salas & James P. Raftery, 2001. "Econometric issues in testing the age neutrality of health care expenditure," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(7), pages 669-671.
- Peter Zweifel & Stefan Felder & Markus Meiers, 1999. "Ageing of population and health care expenditure: a red herring?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(6), pages 485-496.
- Sandra L. Decker & Amy Ellen Schwartz, 2000. "Cigarettes and Alcohol: Substitutes or Complements?," NBER Working Papers 7535, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Leung, S.F. & Yu, S., 1992.
"On the Choice Between Sample Selection and Two-Part Models,"
RCER Working Papers
337, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
- Leung, Siu Fai & Yu, Shihti, 1996. "On the choice between sample selection and two-part models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1-2), pages 197-229.
- Jones, Andrew M, 1989. "A Double-Hurdle Model of Cigarette Consumption," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 4(1), pages 23-39, Jan.-Mar..
- Puhani, Patrick A, 2000. " The Heckman Correction for Sample Selection and Its Critique," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(1), pages 53-68, February.
- Meena Seshamani & Alastair Gray, 2004. "Ageing and health-care expenditure: the red herring argument revisited," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(4), pages 303-314.
- Duan, Naihua, et al, 1984. "Choosing between the Sample-Selection Model and the Multi-part Model," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 2(3), pages 283-89, July.
- Hay, Joel W & Olsen, Randall J, 1984. "Let Them Eat Cake: A Note on Comparing Alternative Models of the Demand for Medical Care," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 2(3), pages 279-82, July.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Nicolas Clifton).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.