An Analysis on Danish Micro Data - School of Economics and ...

ab79† 0.0704 0.0759 -0.0294 0.0512 -0.2887 0.3452
ab1014† 0.0311 0.0738 -0.0993** 0.0425 -0.5838** 0.2515
single† -0.0182 0.0651 -0.1265*** 0.0325 -0.7539*** 0.2070
ieland1† 0.1257 0.1661 0.2351*** 0.0711 0.8327 0.8544
ieland2† 0.1791** 0.0869 0.2720*** 0.0684 1.4750 0.9423
short† 0.0539 0.0617 0.0757*** 0.0281 0.6950*** 0.2112
higher† 0.0040 0.0644 -0.0158 0.0504 -0.0772 0.2841
agesq 0.0001 0.0002 -0.0001 0.0001 -0.0013** 0.0006
useofmedicin -0.0000 0.0000 -0.0001*** 0.0000 -0.0005*** 0.0001
u -0.0322 0.0208 -0.0200** 0.0095 -0.0606 0.0371
No. of obs. 580 3508 3508
Note: † For dummy variables dy/dx is for discrete change from 0 to 1
Time dummies are included in the pooled regression.
The reference categories are less developed county of origin, and basic level of education.
The significance levels are indicated as follows: 10 % - *, 5 % - **, 1 % - ***.
From table 5 it can be seen that the marginal effect of antidepressant use on the probability of
employment as above is negative in all three estimations. Since the explanatory variable is a dummy
variable, the marginal effect is interpreted as the effect on employment, when changing the
antidepressant indicator from 0 to 1. The estimation of a probit on year 2003 gives a marginal effect
of -0.0063 on the antidepressant indicator, but this result is not significant. The pooled probit
estimation results in a marginal effect of -0.0690, which is larger than the effect found in column 1,
but also insignificant. Column 3 presents the results of the random effects probit, which gives a
marginal effect of -0.3334, which is insignificant. The marginal effect of the antidepressant
indicator gets noticeably bigger when applying a larger dataset, and more elaborate methods. The
marginal effect in the probit estimation on year 2003 is very insignificant, but the results from the
pooled probit model and the random effects probit model are both significant at a 20 % level of
significance, which can be seen from the appendices. Although 20 % is not an acceptable level of
significance, it nevertheless shows that the results become more significant when more elaborate
models are applied.
In addition, some of the other explanatory variables become significant when estimated with pooled
probit or panel data methods compared to the probit on a single year, and again the marginal effect
gets numerically larger when estimated with panel data methods. Presence of children in the age 3
to 6 has a small negative effect on employment. Being single also has a negative effect on
employment of 12.65 and 75.39 percentage points, in the pooled probit and the random effects
55