IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Tobit or not Tobit?

  • Stewart, Jay

    (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2 Massachusetts Ave., NE, Washington, DC 20212, USA)

Time-diary surveys collect detailed information about individuals’ activities over a short period of time, typically one day. Thus, it is common to see zero time spent in many activities, even for individuals who regularly do the activity. Because of the large number of zeros, Tobit would seem to be the natural approach. However, once it is recognized that these zeros arise not from censoring, but from a mismatch between the reference period of the data (the diary day) and the period of interest (typically much longer than a day), it is not clear that Tobit is appropriate. I examine the bias associated with alternative procedures for estimating the marginal effects of covariates on time use. I begin by adapting the infrequency of purchase model to time-diary data and showing that OLS estimates are unbiased. Next, using simulated data, I examine the bias associated with three procedures that are commonly used to analyze time-diary data – Tobit, the Cragg [11] two-part model, and OLS. I find that the estimated marginal effects from Tobit are biased and that the bias increases with the fraction of zero-value observations. The two-part model performs significantly better, but generates biased estimates when the number of zeros is a function of the covariates. Only OLS generates unbiased estimates in all of the simulations considered here

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Article provided by IOS Press in its journal Journal of Economic and Social Measurement.

Volume (Year): (2013)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 263-290

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:ris:iosjes:0004
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.iospress.nl/

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ris:iosjes:0004. 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: (Saskia van Wijngaarden)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.