0% found this document useful (0 votes)
23 views5 pages

ECON 345 Problem Set 7 Analysis

ECON 345 Problem set 7

Uploaded by

aaravaggarwalkar
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
23 views5 pages

ECON 345 Problem Set 7 Analysis

ECON 345 Problem set 7

Uploaded by

aaravaggarwalkar
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

ECON 345

Problem set 7

Aarav Aggarwal

V00990817
i) The coefficient on male is 87.75 which means a man
approximately sleeps 1 and a half hours more per week than a
woman, and this is significant at the1% level (t-
male=87.75/34.33=2.56, t critical (2 sided)=2.58) therefore
there is statistically significant evidence that men sleep more
than women all else equal.
ii) One more hour of work (60 mins) leads to 0.163(60)≈ 9.8 less
minutes of sleep. The t stat on totowrk is 0.163/0.018=-9.06
which is highly significant
iii) We need to run a regression without age and age square, as
including them both in the regression age has no effect on the
model.
i) If ∆ cigs is 10 then ∆ log(bwght)=-0.0052x10=0.052=5.2%
lower birth weight
ii) Holding all else equal a white child is likely to weigh 4.5%
more than a nonwhite child, t-white=3, which is statistically
significant
iii) All else equal, if a mother has one more year of education I
associated with a 0.3% increase in birthweight. T-
motheduc=1 which is not statistically significant.
iv) The two equations use different observations therefore, to
conduct a joint significant test we would need to re-
estimate the first equation with the same amount of
observations n as the second.
v) if If ∆ cigs is 20 then ∆ log(bwght)=-
0.0052x20=0.052=10.4% lower birth weight
`

i) the coefficient on male is 3.82, which means holding all


else constant male students score 3.82 percentage points
more the standard error of male is 0.74 than female
students. 95% confidence interval= 3.82± 1.96(0.74) CI:
(3.82-1.45,3.82+1.45) CI: (2.37,5.27) yes this excludes 0
ii) the variable of male holds little explanatory power when
colgpa is included, however the effect is still statistically
significant.
iii) Centring colgpa reduces correlation between colgpa and
male*(colgpa), this aligns closely with the second mode’s
estimate

i) B1 is positive signialing discrimination against minorities


ii) The regression results are ^ approve=0.708+ 0.201 white( 0.018 )( 0.020 )
2
n=1989 , R 0.049 the coefficient on white means that an application
submitted by a white person is 20.1 percent more likely to be
approved (all else equal), this is a statistically significant
difference.
iii) When we add other variables as controls we get b^1 ≈ 0.129 se=0.020
the coefficient has fallen as we are controlling for other factors
that may explain approval but the race effect is still statistically
significant (t-b1=6.45)
iv) Yes there can be predicted values outside (0,1) range and this is
concerning as it can lead to results that don’t make sense
probabilities beyond 1 or 0

You might also like