IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/iza/izawol/journly2017n326.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Maximum likelihood and economic modeling

Author

Listed:
  • Gauthier Lanot

    (Umeå University, Sweden)

Abstract

Most of the data available to economists is observational rather than the outcome of natural or quasi experiments. This complicates analysis because it is common for observationally distinct individuals to exhibit similar responses to a given environment and for observationally identical individuals to respond differently to similar incentives. In such situations, using maximum likelihood methods to fit an economic model can provide a general approach to describing the observed data, whatever its nature. The predictions obtained from a fitted model provide crucial information about the distributional outcomes of economic policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Gauthier Lanot, 2017. "Maximum likelihood and economic modeling," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 326-326, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:iza:izawol:journl:y:2017:n:326
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wol.iza.org/articles/maximum-likelihood-and-economic-modeling-1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://wol.iza.org/articles/maximum-likelihood-and-economic-modeling
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Angus Deaton, 2010. "Instruments, Randomization, and Learning about Development," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(2), pages 424-455, June.
    2. Richard Blundell & Monica Costa Dias, 2009. "Alternative Approaches to Evaluation in Empirical Microeconomics," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 44(3).
    3. Martin Browning & Mette Ejrnæs & Javier Alvarez, 2010. "Modelling Income Processes with Lots of Heterogeneity," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 77(4), pages 1353-1381.
    4. Gerard J. Berg & Johan Vikström, 2014. "Monitoring Job Offer Decisions, Punishments, Exit to Work, and Job Quality," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 116(2), pages 284-334, April.
    5. Geyer, Johannes & Haan, Peter & Wrohlich, Katharina, 2015. "The effects of family policy on maternal labor supply: Combining evidence from a structural model and a quasi-experimental approach," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 84-98.
    6. Raj Chetty, 2009. "Sufficient Statistics for Welfare Analysis: A Bridge Between Structural and Reduced-Form Methods," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 451-488, May.
    7. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2009. "Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 8769.
    8. Kenneth I. Wolpin & Petra E. Todd, 2006. "Assessing the Impact of a School Subsidy Program in Mexico: Using a Social Experiment to Validate a Dynamic Behavioral Model of Child Schooling and Fertility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1384-1417, December.
    9. Aviv Nevo & Michael D. Whinston, 2010. "Taking the Dogma out of Econometrics: Structural Modeling and Credible Inference," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(2), pages 69-82, Spring.
    10. Fedor Iskhakov, 2010. "Structural dynamic model of retirement with latent health indicator," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 13(3), pages 126-161, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thoresen, Thor O. & Vattø, Trine E., 2015. "Validation of the discrete choice labor supply model by methods of the new tax responsiveness literature," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 38-53.
    2. de Boer, Henk-Wim & Jongen, Egbert L. W., 2020. "Analysing Tax-Benefit Reforms in the Netherlands: Using Structural Models and Natural Experiments," IZA Discussion Papers 12892, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Jeffrey Smith & Arthur Sweetman, 2016. "Viewpoint: Estimating the causal effects of policies and programs," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 49(3), pages 871-905, August.
    4. Jiaming Mao & Jingzhi Xu, 2020. "Ensemble Learning with Statistical and Structural Models," Papers 2006.05308, arXiv.org.
    5. Jiaming Mao & Zhesheng Zheng, 2020. "Structural Regularization," Papers 2004.12601, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2020.
    6. Titus J. Galama & Adriana Lleras-Muney & Hans van Kippersluis, 2018. "The Effect of Education on Health and Mortality: A Review of Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Evidence," NBER Working Papers 24225, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Słoczyński, Tymon, 2012. "New Evidence on Linear Regression and Treatment Effect Heterogeneity," MPRA Paper 39524, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Lechner, Michael, 2013. "Treatment effects and panel data," Economics Working Paper Series 1314, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    9. Cain Polidano & Justin van de Ven & Sarah Voitchovsky, 2017. "The Power of Self-Interest: Effects of Education and Training Entitlements in Later-Life," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2017n12, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    10. Sansone, Dario, 2019. "Pink work: Same-sex marriage, employment and discrimination," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    11. Pierre Cahuc & Stéphane Carcillo & Thomas Le Barbanchon, 2019. "The Effectiveness of Hiring Credits," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 86(2), pages 593-626.
    12. Susan Athey & Raj Chetty & Guido Imbens, 2020. "Combining Experimental and Observational Data to Estimate Treatment Effects on Long Term Outcomes," Papers 2006.09676, arXiv.org.
    13. Andreas Georgiadis & Christos N. Pitelis, 2016. "The Impact of Employees' and Managers' Training on the Performance of Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Evidence from a Randomized Natural Experiment in the UK Service Sector," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 54(2), pages 409-421, June.
    14. Petri Böckerman & Alex Bryson & Pekka Ilmakunnas, 2013. "Does high involvement management lead to higher pay?," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 176(4), pages 861-885, October.
    15. Parente, Paulo M.D.C. & Santos Silva, J.M.C., 2012. "A cautionary note on tests of overidentifying restrictions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 314-317.
    16. Henk Folmer & Olof Johansson-Stenman, 2011. "Does Environmental Economics Produce Aeroplanes Without Engines? On the Need for an Environmental Social Science," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(3), pages 337-361, March.
    17. Gürtzgen, Nicole & Hiesinger, Karolin, 2020. "Dismissal protection and long-term sickness absence: First evidence from Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-040, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    18. Liran Einav & Amy Finkelstein, 2017. "Moral Hazard in Health Insurance: What We Know and How We Know It," NBER Working Papers 24055, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Gonzales Mariella & Gianmarco León-Ciliotta & Luis R. Martinez, 2018. "How effective are monetary incentives to vote? Evidence from a nationwide policy," Economics Working Papers 1667, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Jul 2019.
    20. Gregory J. Wawro & Ira Katznelson, 2020. "American political development and new challenges of causal inference," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 185(3), pages 299-314, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    log-likelihood; economic model; parameter estimates;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C5 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling
    • J2 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor
    • H3 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iza:izawol:journl:y:2017:n:326. See general 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: (Bloomsbury Information Ltd). General contact details of provider: http://www.iza.org .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.