Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
AI Research Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 81 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 42 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 23 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 20 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 103 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 188 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 454 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 38 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Count Data Models with Heterogeneous Peer Effects under Rational Expectations (2405.17290v1)

Published 27 May 2024 in econ.EM

Abstract: This paper develops a micro-founded peer effect model for count responses using a game of incomplete information. The model incorporates heterogeneity in peer effects through agents' groups based on observed characteristics. Parameter identification is established using the identification condition of linear models, which relies on the presence of friends' friends who are not direct friends in the network. I show that this condition extends to a large class of nonlinear models. The model parameters are estimated using the nested pseudo-likelihood approach, controlling for network endogeneity. I present an empirical application on students' participation in extracurricular activities. I find that females are more responsive to their peers than males, whereas male peers do not influence male students. An easy-to-use R packag--named CDatanet--is available for implementing the model.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (61)
  1. Aguirregabiria, V. and P. Mira (2007): “Sequential estimation of dynamic discrete games,” Econometrica, 75, 1–53.
  2. Aradillas-Lopez, A. (2010): “Semiparametric estimation of a simultaneous game with incomplete information,” Journal of Econometrics, 157, 409–431.
  3. Aradillas-López, A. and A. Gandhi (2016): “Estimation of games with ordered actions: An application to chain-store entry,” Quantitative Economics, 7, 727–780.
  4. Aradillas-Lopez, A. and A. M. Rosen (2022): “Inference in ordered response games with complete information,” Journal of Econometrics, 226, 451–476.
  5. Bajari, P., H. Hong, J. Krainer, and D. Nekipelov (2010): “Estimating static models of strategic interactions,” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 28, 469–482.
  6. Ballester, C., A. Calvó-Armengol, and Y. Zenou (2006): “Who’s who in networks. Wanted: The key player,” Econometrica, 74, 1403–1417.
  7. Beugnot, J., B. Fortin, G. Lacroix, and M. C. Villeval (2019): “Gender and peer effects on performance in social networks,” European Economic Review, 113, 207–224.
  8. Blume, L. E., W. A. Brock, S. N. Durlauf, and R. Jayaraman (2015): “Linear social interactions models,” Journal of Political Economy, 123, 444–496.
  9. Boucher, V. (2016): “Conformism and self-selection in social networks,” Journal of Public Economics, 136, 30–44.
  10. Boucher, V. and Y. Bramoullé (2020): “Binary Outcomes and Linear Interactions,” Tech. rep., Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France.
  11. Boucher, V., F. A. Dedewanou, and A. Dufays (2022): “Peer-induced beliefs regarding college participation,” Economics of Education Review, 90, 102307.
  12. Boucher, V. and B. Fortin (2016): “Some challenges in the empirics of the effects of networks,” The Oxford Handbook on the Economics of Networks, 277–302.
  13. Boucher, V. and A. Houndetoungan (2022): “Estimating peer effects using partial network data,” Tech. rep., Centre de recherche sur les risques les enjeux économiques et les politiques.
  14. Boucher, V., M. Rendall, P. Ushchev, and Y. Zenou (2024): “Toward a general theory of peer effects,” Econometrica, 92, 543–565.
  15. Bramoullé, Y., H. Djebbari, and B. Fortin (2009): “Identification of peer effects through social networks,” Journal of Econometrics, 150, 41–55.
  16. ——— (2020): “Peer effects in networks: A survey,” Annual Review of Economics, 12, 603–629.
  17. Brock, W. A. and S. N. Durlauf (2001): “Discrete choice with social interactions,” The Review of Economic Studies, 68, 235–260.
  18. ——— (2002): “A multinomial-choice model of neighborhood effects,” American Economic Review, 92, 298–303.
  19. ——— (2007): “Identification of binary choice models with social interactions,” Journal of Econometrics, 140, 52–75.
  20. Calvó-Armengol, A., E. Patacchini, and Y. Zenou (2009): “Peer effects and social networks in education,” The Review of Economic Studies, 76, 1239–1267.
  21. Comola, M., R. Dieye, and B. Fortin (2022): “Heterogeneous peer effects and gender-based interventions for teenage obesity,” Tech. rep., CIRANO.
  22. De Paula, Á. (2013): “Econometric analysis of games with multiple equilibria,” Annual Review of Economics, 5, 107–131.
  23. ——— (2017): “Econometrics of network models,” in Advances in economics and econometrics: Theory and applications, eleventh world congress, Cambridge University Press Cambridge, 268–323.
  24. ——— (2020): “Econometric models of network formation,” Annual Review of Economics, 12, 775–799.
  25. Dzemski, A. (2019): “An empirical model of dyadic link formation in a network with unobserved heterogeneity,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 101, 763–776.
  26. Fortin, B. and M. Yazbeck (2015): “Peer effects, fast food consumption and adolescent weight gain,” Journal of Health Economics, 42, 125–138.
  27. Fujimoto, K. and T. W. Valente (2013): “Alcohol peer influence of participating in organized school activities: a network approach.” Health Psychology, 32, 1084.
  28. Goldsmith-Pinkham, P. and G. W. Imbens (2013): “Social networks and the identification of peer effects,” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 31, 253–264.
  29. Graham, B. S. (2017): “An econometric model of network formation with degree heterogeneity,” Econometrica, 85, 1033–1063.
  30. Guerra, J.-A. and M. Mohnen (2020): “Multinomial choice with social interactions: occupations in Victorian London,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 1–44.
  31. Hastie, T. J. (2017): “Generalized additive models,” in Statistical models in S, Routledge, 249–307.
  32. Houndetoungan, A. and A. H. Maoude (2024): “Inference for Two-Stage Extremum Estimators,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.05030.
  33. Hsieh, C.-S. and L. F. Lee (2016): “A social interactions model with endogenous friendship formation and selectivity,” Journal of Applied Econometrics, 31, 301–319.
  34. Jochmans, K. (2023): “Peer effects and endogenous social interactions,” Journal of Econometrics, 235, 1203–1214.
  35. Johnsson, I. and H. R. Moon (2021): “Estimation of peer effects in endogenous social networks: control function approach,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 103, 328–345.
  36. Kasahara, H. and K. Shimotsu (2012): “Sequential estimation of structural models with a fixed point constraint,” Econometrica, 80, 2303–2319.
  37. Lee, C. G., J. Kwon, H. Sung, I. Oh, O. Kim, J. Kang, and J.-W. Park (2020): “The effect of physically or non-physically forced sexual assault on trajectories of sport participation from adolescence through young adulthood,” Archives of Public Health, 78, 1–10.
  38. Lee, L.-F. (2004): “Asymptotic distributions of quasi-maximum likelihood estimators for spatial autoregressive models,” Econometrica, 72, 1899–1925.
  39. Lee, L.-f., J. Li, and X. Lin (2014): “Binary choice models with social network under heterogeneous rational expectations,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 96, 402–417.
  40. Lee, L.-F., X. Liu, E. Patacchini, and Y. Zenou (2021): “Who is the key player? A network analysis of juvenile delinquency,” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 39, 849–857.
  41. Li, J. and L.-f. Lee (2009): “Binary choice under social interactions: an empirical study with and without subjective data on expectations,” Journal of Applied Econometrics, 24, 257–281.
  42. Lin, Z. and Y. Hu (2024): “Binary choice with misclassification and social interactions, with an application to peer effects in attitude,” Journal of Econometrics, 238, 105551.
  43. Lin, Z. and H. Xu (2017): “Estimation of social-influence-dependent peer pressure in a large network game,” The Econometrics Journal, 20, S86–S102.
  44. Liu, X. (2019): “Simultaneous equations with binary outcomes and social interactions,” Econometric Reviews, 38, 921–937.
  45. Liu, X., E. Patacchini, and Y. Zenou (2014): “Endogenous peer effects: local aggregate or local average?” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 103, 39–59.
  46. Liu, X. and J. Zhou (2017): “A social interaction model with ordered choices,” Economics Letters, 161, 86–89.
  47. Manski, C. F. (1988): “Identification of binary response models,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83, 729–738.
  48. ——— (1993): “Identification of endogenous social effects: The reflection problem,” The Review of Economic Studies, 60, 531–542.
  49. McNeal Jr, R. B. (1999): “Participation in high school extracurricular activities: Investigating school effects,” Social Science Quarterly, 291–309.
  50. McPherson, M., L. Smith-Lovin, and J. M. Cook (2001): “Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks,” Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.
  51. Murota, K. (1998): “Discrete convex analysis,” Mathematical Programming, 83, 313–371.
  52. Newey, W. K. and D. McFadden (1994): “Large sample estimation and hypothesis testing,” Handbook of Econometrics, 4, 2111–2245.
  53. Newton, N. J., J. Pladevall-Guyer, R. Gonzalez, and J. Smith (2018): “Activity engagement and activity-related experiences: The role of personality,” The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 73, 1480–1490.
  54. Patacchini, E. and Y. Zenou (2012): “Juvenile delinquency and conformism,” The Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 28, 1–31.
  55. Peng, S. (2019): “Heterogeneous endogenous effects in networks,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.00663.
  56. Soetevent, A. R. and P. Kooreman (2007): “A discrete-choice model with social interactions: with an application to high school teen behavior,” Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22, 599–624.
  57. Wan, Y. and H. Xu (2014): “Semiparametric identification of binary decision games of incomplete information with correlated private signals,” Journal of Econometrics, 182, 235–246.
  58. Xu, H. (2018): “Social interactions in large networks: A game theoretic approach,” International Economic Review, 59, 257–284.
  59. Xu, X. and L.-f. Lee (2015): “Maximum likelihood estimation of a spatial autoregressive Tobit model,” Journal of Econometrics, 188, 264–280.
  60. Yan, T., B. Jiang, S. E. Fienberg, and C. Leng (2019): “Statistical inference in a directed network model with covariates,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 114, 857–868.
  61. Yang, C. and L.-f. Lee (2017): “Social interactions under incomplete information with heterogeneous expectations,” Journal of Econometrics, 198, 65–83.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now
Lightbulb On Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now
List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

User Circle Single Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets

This paper has been mentioned in 2 posts and received 0 likes.

User Circle Single Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up to View