IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v40y2011i3p511-535.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparisons of Tobit, Linear, and Poisson-Gamma Regression Models

Author

Listed:
  • Judith E. Brown
  • Peter K. Dunn

Abstract

Time use data (TUD) are distinctive, being episodic in nature and consisting of both continuous and discrete (exact zeros) values. TUD is non-negative and generally right skewed. To analyze such data, the Tobit, and to a lesser extent, linear regression models are often used. Tobit models assume the zeros represent censored values of an underlying normally distributed latent variable that theoretically includes negative values. Both the linear regression and Tobit models have normality as a key assumption. The Poisson-gamma distribution is a distribution with both a point mass at zero (corresponding to zero time spent on a given activity) and a continuous component. Using generalized linear models, TUD can be modeled utilizing the Poisson-gamma distribution. Using TUD, Tobit and linear regression models are compared to the Poisson-gamma with respect to the interpretation of the model, the model fit (analysis of residuals), and model performance through the use of a simulated data experiment. The Poisson-gamma is found to be theoretically and empirically more sound in many circumstances.

Suggested Citation

  • Judith E. Brown & Peter K. Dunn, 2011. "Comparisons of Tobit, Linear, and Poisson-Gamma Regression Models," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 40(3), pages 511-535, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:40:y:2011:i:3:p:511-535
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124111415370
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124111415370
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124111415370?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cragg, John G, 1971. "Some Statistical Models for Limited Dependent Variables with Application to the Demand for Durable Goods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 39(5), pages 829-844, September.
    2. Hurd, Michael, 1979. "Estimation in truncated samples when there is heteroscedasticity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2-3), pages 247-258.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Priyanka Anand & Yonatan Ben-Shalom, 2014. "How Do Working-Age People With Disabilities Spend Their Time? New Evidence From the American Time Use Survey," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 51(6), pages 1977-1998, December.
    2. Jones, Benjamin A., 2016. "Work more and play less? Time use impacts of changing ecosystem services: The case of the invasive emerald ash borer," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 49-58.
    3. Spitzer, Sonja & Hammer, Bernhard, 2016. "The Division of Labour Within Households: Fractional Logit Estimates based on the Austrian Time Use Survey," MPRA Paper 81791, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Lyn Craig & Janeen Baxter, 2016. "Domestic Outsourcing, Housework Shares and Subjective Time Pressure: Gender Differences in the Correlates of Hiring Help," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 125(1), pages 271-288, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hao, Siyuan, 2023. "Modeling hospitalization medical expenditure of the elderly in China," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 450-461.
    2. Carson, Richard T. & Louviere, Jordan J., 2014. "Statistical properties of consideration sets," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 37-48.
    3. Bengt Muthen & Karl G. Jöreskog, 1983. "Selectivity Problems in Quasi-Experimental Studies," Evaluation Review, , vol. 7(2), pages 139-174, April.
    4. Cornelia Lawson, 2013. "Academic Inventions Outside the University: Investigating Patent Ownership in the UK," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 385-398, July.
    5. Jensen, Kimberly L., 1995. "Fluid Milk Purchase Patterns In The South: Effects Of Use Of Nutrition Information And Household Characteristics," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 27(2), pages 1-14, December.
    6. Marcén, Miriam & Molina, José Alberto & Morales, Marina, 2018. "The effect of culture on the fertility decisions of immigrant women in the United States," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 15-28.
    7. Langyintuo, Augustine S. & Mungoma, Catherine, 2008. "The effect of household wealth on the adoption of improved maize varieties in Zambia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 550-559, December.
    8. Dorotic, Matilda & Verhoef, Peter C. & Fok, Dennis & Bijmolt, Tammo H.A., 2014. "Reward redemption effects in a loyalty program when customers choose how much and when to redeem," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 339-355.
    9. Bradfield, Tracy & Butler, Robert & Dillon, Emma J. & Hennessy, Thia & Loughrey, Jason, 2023. "The impact of long-term land leases on farm investment: Evidence from the Irish dairy sector," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    10. repec:zbw:rwirep:0200 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Ronelle Burger & Canh Thien Dang & Trudy Owens, 2017. "Better performing NGOs do report more accurately: Evidence from investigating Ugandan NGO financial accounts," Discussion Papers 2017-10, University of Nottingham, CREDIT.
    12. Niclas Hagelin, 2003. "Why firms hedge with currency derivatives: an examination of transaction and translation exposure," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 55-69.
    13. Subir K. Chakrabarti & Srikant Devaraj & Pankaj C. Patel, 2021. "Minimum wage and restaurant hygiene violations: Evidence from Seattle," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(1), pages 85-99, January.
    14. Schleich, Joachim & Alsheimer, Sven, 2024. "The relationship between willingness to pay and carbon footprint knowledge: Are individuals willing to pay more to offset their carbon footprint if they learn about its size and distance to the 1.5 °C," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    15. Frank Crowley & John Eakins & Declan Jordan, 2012. "Participation,Expenditure and Regressivity in the Irish Lottery:Evidence from Irish Household Budget Survey 2004/2005," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 43(2), pages 199-225.
    16. Helen Jensen & Justo Manrique, 1998. "Demand for food commodities by income groups in Indonesia," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 491-501.
    17. Torres, Marcelo de O. & Felthoven, Ronald G., 2014. "Productivity growth and product choice in catch share fisheries: The case of Alaska pollock," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(PA), pages 280-289.
    18. Frank, Julieta & Garcia, Philip & Irwin, Scott H., 2008. "To What Surprises Do Hog Futures Markets Respond?," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 73-87, April.
    19. Paul L. Burgess & Stuart A. Low, 1998. "How do Unemployment Insurance and Recall Expectations Affect on-the-job Search among Workers Who Receive Advance Notice of Layoff?," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 51(2), pages 241-252, January.
    20. Giuseppe Bertola & Luigi Guiso & Luigi Pistaferri, 2005. "Uncertainty and Consumer Durables Adjustment," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(4), pages 973-1007.
    21. Catia Batista & Janis Umblijs, 2016. "Do migrants send remittances as a way of self-insurance?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 68(1), pages 108-130.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:40:y:2011:i:3:p:511-535. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.