Fixed and Random Effects in Stochastic Frontier Models

Received stochastic frontier analyses with panel data have relied on traditional fixed and random effects models. We propose extensions that circumvent two shortcomings of these approaches. The conventional panel data estimators assume that technical or cost inefficiency is time invariant. Second, the fixed and random effects estimators force any time invariant cross unit heterogeneity into the same term that is being used to capture the inefficiency. Inefficiency measures in these models may be picking up heterogeneity in addition to or even instead of inefficiency. A fixed effects model is extended to the stochastic frontier model using results that specifically employ the nonlinear specification. The random effects model is reformulated as a special case of the random parameters model. The techniques are illustrated in applications to the U.S. banking industry and a cross country comparison of the efficiency of health care delivery.JEL classification: C1, C4     

Scaling for Residual Variance Components of Ordered Category Responses in Generalised Linear Mixed Multilevel Models

A method is proposed that enables changes in variance components to be computed from the results of fitting ordered response generalised models with multilevel and random effects. This deals with the rescaling of the response that occurs as we add new features to a developing model.     

Methods for the Analysis of Explanatory Linear Regression Models with Missing Data Not at Random

Since the work of Little and Rubin (1987) not substantial advances in the analysisof explanatory regression models for incomplete data with missing not at randomhave been achieved, mainly due to the difficulty of verifying the randomness ofthe unknown data. In practice, the analysis of nonrandom missing data is donewith techniques designed for datasets with random or completely random missingdata, as complete case analysis, mean imputation, regression imputation, maximumlikelihood or multiple imputation. However, the data conditions required to minimizethe bias derived from an incorrect analysis have not been fully determined. In thepresent work, several Monte Carlo simulations have been carried out to establishthe best strategy of analysis for random missing data applicable in datasets withnonrandom missing data. The factors involved in simulations are sample size,percentage of missing data, predictive power of the imputation model and existenceof interaction between predictors. The results show that the smallest bias is obtainedwith maximum likelihood and multiple imputation techniques, although with lowpercentages of missing data, absence of interaction and high predictive power ofthe imputation model (frequent data structures in research on child and adolescentpsychopathology) acceptable results are obtained with the simplest regression imputation.     

Multiple Local Maxima in Restricted Likelihoods and Posterior Distributions for Mixed Linear Models

Scattered reports of multiple maxima in posterior distributions or likelihoods for mixed linear models appear throughout the literature. Less scrutinised is the restricted likelihood, which is the posterior distribution for a specific prior distribution. This paper surveys existing literature and proposes a unifying framework for understanding multiple maxima. For those problems with covariance structures that are diagonalisable in a specific sense, the restricted likelihood can be viewed as a generalised linear model with gamma errors, identity link and a prior distribution on the error variance. The generalised linear model portion of the restricted likelihood can be made to conflict with the portion of the restricted likelihood that functions like a prior distribution on the error variance, giving two local maxima in the restricted likelihood. Applying in addition an explicit conjugate prior distribution to variance parameters permits a second local maximum in the marginal posterior distribution even if the likelihood contribution has a single maximum. Moreover, reparameterisation from variance to precision can change the posterior modality; the converse also is true. Modellers should beware of these potential pitfalls when selecting prior distributions or using peak‐finding algorithms to estimate parameters.