Thanks, Prof. Cottrell. 

Professors, I have one additional question.

Although the coefficient estimates of HIP match those of Stata IV Probit exactly, I have found that the endogeneity test (Wald) result is a little bit different. For example, the HIP give me Wald (t = 4.06864, p = 0.0437), but the Stata gives me Wald (t = 3.68, p = 0.0551). My sample size N = 2204. Cragg-Donald shows 107.096 and both AR and Wald tests reject the null of weak instruments.

As shown, this is a delicate situation. My question is that should I reject or not to reject the null of exogeneity in this case? and What might attribute to the difference in the test? Thanks.

Best regards,

Juehui Shi (Richard)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RA, TA, and Lecturer 
PhD Management Candidate 
University at Buffalo, SUNY
School of Management
Department of Operations Management and Strategy
Jacobs Management Center
Buffalo, NY 14260-4000

Contact information
Tel.: (716) 334-9757 [preferred]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
https://www.linkedin.com/in/richardrjs 

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Allin Cottrell <cottrell@wfu.edu> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Oct 2016, Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti wrote:

On Wed, 19 Oct 2016, Juehui Shi wrote:

Hello Prof. Lucchetti and Prof. Pigini,

I'd like to cite the HIP package in my paper. Can you write me the proper
citation? Thanks.

I really wouldn't know. But thanks anyway! :)

I guess Juehui could cite the URL for the HIP addon:

HIP 0.41, Riccardo "Jack" Lucchetti and Claudia Pigini,
https://sourceforge.net/projects/gretl/files/addons/1.10.0/HIP.zip

Allin Cottrell