Closed a-torgovitsky closed 4 years ago
Ah, my mistake. I simply did not include it in the output. Here's what it is now:
--------------------------------------------------
Results
--------------------------------------------------
Point estimate of the target parameter: -0.5949017
Number of bootstraps: 5
Bootstrapped confidence intervals (nonparametric):
90%: [-0.5949297, -0.5948301]
95%: [-0.5949297, -0.5948301]
99%: [-0.5949297, -0.5948301]
p-value: 0
Bootstrapped J-test p-value: 0
Warning message:
If argument 'point' is set to TRUE, then shape
restrictions on m0 and m1 are ignored, and the
audit procedure is not implemented.
The user can also access results this way:
> r$jtest
Bootstrapped p-value J-statistic p-value
0.00000000 15.43732815 0.03078471
df
7.00000000
The last two elements correspond to the asymptotic J-test. Let me know if you'd like to get rid of that.
What is the asymptotic J-test?
Is it output from gmm
?
Yep, that's what it is.
Ok, so it's not accounting for the uncertainty in the propensity score I think it's fine to keep it in (probably helps for diagnostics), but maybe just mark what it is more clearly like "J-statistic (ignoring first step)" and "p-value (ignoring first step)"
Sure no problem. But just to make sure: isn't the J-statistic the same regardless of whether we include the first step?
Ah yes sorry -- the test statistic is the same So just "p-value (ignoring first step)" is good
Great. Done!
Doesn't appear to be