4 level cross-classified model estimation
Posted: Mon Feb 29, 2016 7:16 pm
Dear MLwiN users,
I would like to estimate a 4-level cross-classified random intercept model in Stata by using the runmlwin command.
The model is similar to the one presented in the paper of Castellaneta and Gottschalg (2016). (The paper is only here for referencing and it does not really matter what each level means, the structure is important).
The authors have the following structure of the data:
1) year observations (level 1) are nested within
2) buyout investments (buyouts) (level 2), which are simultaneously nested (i.e., cross-classified) within both
3) industries (level 3) and private equity (PE) funds (level 3);
4) PE funds are then nested within PE firms (level 4).
The authors used MLwiN software and the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) estimation procedure with a Bayesian estimation. The authors ran the MLwiN software in Stata using the runmlwin command.
I extracted a table from the paper to show what I mean (attached picture below).
In one of the forum's topics (https://www.cmm.bristol.ac.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=55) I found the information that "there is no way to specify that the cross classification should apply to just certain pairs of levels". It is additionally mentioned that MLwiN looks at the actual data, and "if there is no cross classification present in the data between certain pairs of levels, then treating those levels as cross classified is actually the same thing as treating them as hierarchical" (provided that categories are set up properly).
So, my question is whether the Stata command, which is stated below, is correct with regard to the above-mentioned structure of the data (also depicted in the attachment). Please ignore the fixed effect part. I am only interested in the random effect part.
I will be very grateful for any help!
References:
Castellaneta, F., & Gottschalg, O. (2016). Does ownership matter in private equity? The sources of variance in buyouts' performance. Strategic Management Journal, 37(2), 330-348.
I would like to estimate a 4-level cross-classified random intercept model in Stata by using the runmlwin command.
The model is similar to the one presented in the paper of Castellaneta and Gottschalg (2016). (The paper is only here for referencing and it does not really matter what each level means, the structure is important).
The authors have the following structure of the data:
1) year observations (level 1) are nested within
2) buyout investments (buyouts) (level 2), which are simultaneously nested (i.e., cross-classified) within both
3) industries (level 3) and private equity (PE) funds (level 3);
4) PE funds are then nested within PE firms (level 4).
The authors used MLwiN software and the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) estimation procedure with a Bayesian estimation. The authors ran the MLwiN software in Stata using the runmlwin command.
I extracted a table from the paper to show what I mean (attached picture below).
In one of the forum's topics (https://www.cmm.bristol.ac.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=55) I found the information that "there is no way to specify that the cross classification should apply to just certain pairs of levels". It is additionally mentioned that MLwiN looks at the actual data, and "if there is no cross classification present in the data between certain pairs of levels, then treating those levels as cross classified is actually the same thing as treating them as hierarchical" (provided that categories are set up properly).
So, my question is whether the Stata command, which is stated below, is correct with regard to the above-mentioned structure of the data (also depicted in the attachment). Please ignore the fixed effect part. I am only interested in the random effect part.
Code: Select all
runmlwin buyout_performance cons, level5(PE firm: cons) level4(industry: cons) level3(PE fund: cons) level2(buyout: cons) level1(year: cons) mcmc(cc) initsb(b) nopause
References:
Castellaneta, F., & Gottschalg, O. (2016). Does ownership matter in private equity? The sources of variance in buyouts' performance. Strategic Management Journal, 37(2), 330-348.