The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Fixed Effects and Bias Due to the Incidental Parameters Problem in the Tobit Model
Abstract
The maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) in nonlinear panel data models with fixed effects is widely understood (with a few exceptions) to be biased and inconsistent when T, the length of the panel, is small and fixed. However, there is surprisingly little theoretical or empirical evidence on the behavior of the estimator on which to base this conclusion. The received studies have focused almost exclusively on coefficient estimation in two binary choice models, the probit and logit models. In this note, we use Monte Carlo methods to examine the behavior of the MLE of the fixed effects tobit model. We find that the estimator's behavior is quite unlike that of the estimators of the binary choice models. Among our findings are that the location coefficients in the tobit model, unlike those in the probit and logit models, are unaffected by the “incidental parameters problem.” But, a surprising result related to the disturbance variance emerges instead – the finite sample bias appears here rather than in the slopes. This has implications for estimation of marginal effects and asymptotic standard errors, which are also examined in this paper. The effects are also examined for the probit and truncated regression models, extending the range of received results in the first of these beyond the widely cited biases in the coefficient estimators.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Jia, N., Huang, K. G., & Man Zhang, C. (2019) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2016.0543 · Cited by 532
Political Uncertainty and IPO Activity: Evidence from U.S. Gubernatorial Elections
Çolak, G., Durnev, A., & Qian, Y. (2017) · Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis · doi:10.1017/s0022109017000862 · Cited by 486
Peer performance and stock market entry
Kaustia, M., & Knüpfer, S. (2012) · Journal of Financial Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.01.010 · Cited by 420
Castleman, B. L., & Page, L. C. (2015) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2014.12.008 · Cited by 403
Castleman, B. L., Page, L. C., & Schooley, K. (2014) · Journal of Policy Analysis and Management · doi:10.1002/pam.21743 · Cited by 136
Metadata
- Authors
- Greene, W.
- Venue
- Econometric Reviews
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2004-12-31
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 125-147
- ISSN
- 0747-4938 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-4168
- OpenAlex
- W2018712474
- Cited by
- 643
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 25.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fixed Effects and Bias Due to the Incidental Parameters Problem in the Tobit Model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1081/etc-120039606
- The paper
- Greene, W. (2004). Fixed Effects and Bias Due to the Incidental Parameters Problem in the Tobit Model. Econometric Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1081/etc-120039606
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.