Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-cf9d5c678-ljdsm Total loading time: 0.231 Render date: 2021-08-06T02:20:07.690Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Estimating Onsets of Binary Events in Panel Data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2017

Liam F. McGrath
Affiliation:
Centre for Comparative and International Studies (CIS) and Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED), ETH Zürich, Switzerland
Corresponding

Abstract

Onsets of binary events are often of interest to political scientists, whether they be regime changes, the occurrence of civil war, or the signing of bilateral agreements, to name a few. Often researchers transform the binary event outcome of interest, by setting ongoing years to zero, to create a variable which measures the onset of the event. While this may seem an intuitive way to go about estimating models where onset is the outcome of interest, it results in two problems that can affect substantive inferences. First, it creates two qualitatively different meanings for a unit time period to have a zero, which estimators are unable to “know.” Second, it ignores the possibility that variables may have differing effects upon binary event onsets and durations. This article explores how much this transformation can harm our substantive inferences by analytically demonstrating the resulting bias and the use of Monte Carlo experiments, as well as offering recommendations to avoid these problems. I also conduct a sensitivity analysis on the determinants of civil war onset to examine how substantive inferences are affected by this issue. In doing so, I find that there is considerable difference in the size of estimated coefficients and whether a variable is considered a robust determinant of civil war.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Political Methodology 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Author's note: Thanks to Janina Beiser, Kevin Clarke, Patrick Kuhn, Thomas Plümper, Curtis Signorino, Janne Tukiainen, Robert Walker, Julian Wucherpfennig, and Christopher Zorn, the Editor, and the anonymous reviewers for comments and suggestions. Replication materials are available at http://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/DOSJCD. Supplementary materials for this article are available on the Political Analysis Web site.

References

Bane, Mary Jo, and Ellwood, David T. 1986. Slipping into and out of poverty. Journal of Human Resources 21:223.Google Scholar
Barmby, Tim. 1998. The relationship between event history and discrete time duration models: An application to the analysis of personnel absenteeism. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 60:261–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, Nathaniel, Katz, Jonathan N., and Tucker, Richard. 1998. Taking time seriously: Time-series-cross-section analysis with a binary dependent variable. American Journal of Political Science 42(4): 1260–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, Nathaniell, Epstein, Simon Jackman, David, and O’Halloran, Sharyn. 2001. Alternative models of dynamics in binary time-series-cross-section models: The example of state failure. Working paper.Google Scholar
Bergholt, D., and Lujala, P. 2012. Climate-related natural disasters, economic growth, and armed civil conflict. Journal of Peace Research 49(1): 147–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boskin, M. J., and Nold, F. C. 1975. A Markov model of turnover in aid to families with dependent children. Journal of Human Resources 10:476–81.Google Scholar
Carter, David B., and Signorino, Curtis S. 2010. Back to the future: Modeling time dependence in binary data. Political Analysis 18(3): 271–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diggle, Peter, Liang, Kung-Yee, and Zeger, Scott L. 1994. Analysis of longitudinal data. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fearon, James D., and Laitin, David D. 2003. Ethnicity, insurgency, and civil war. American Political Science Review 97(1): 7590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Getmansky, Anna. 2012. You can't win if you don't fight: The role of regime type in counterinsurgency outbreaks and outcomes. Journal of Conflict Resolution 57:709–34.Google Scholar
Hegre, Havard, and Sambanis, Nicholas. 2006. Sensitivity analysis of empirical results on civil war onset. Journal of Conflict Resolution 50:508–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackman, Simon. 2000. In and out of war and peace: Transitional models of international conflict. Working paper.Google Scholar
King, Gary, and Zeng, Lanche. 2001. Explaining rare events in international relations. International Organization 55(3): 693715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGrath, Liam F. 2015. Replication data for: Estimating onsets of binary events in panel data. Harvard Dataverse, V1 [UNF:6:QIfNzWwGaK+slGPMJKjf+w==] http://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/DOSJCD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, Bruce, and Mittag, Nikolas. 2013. Misclassification in binary choice models. Working paper.Google Scholar
Przeworski, Adam, and Raymond Vreeland, James. 2002. A statistical model of bilateral cooperation. Political Analysis 10(2): 101–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, Adam, Alvarez, Michael E., Antonio Cheibub, Jose, and Limongi, Fernando. 2000. Democracy and development: Political institutions and well-being in the world, 1950–1990. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sala-I-Martin, Xavier X. 1997. I just ran two million regressions. American Economic Review 87(2): 178–83.Google Scholar
Yamaguchi, Kazuo. 1991. Event history analysis. Vol. 28 of Applied Social Research Methods Series. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

McGrath supplementary material

Supplementary Material

Download McGrath supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 5 MB
21
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Estimating Onsets of Binary Events in Panel Data
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Estimating Onsets of Binary Events in Panel Data
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Estimating Onsets of Binary Events in Panel Data
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *