ESSAY: CHOOSING BETWEEN FIXED AND RANDOM EFFECTS IN PANEL DATA ANALYSIS

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18568/internext.v19i1.768

Keywords:

Quantitative research, Theoretical choices, Methodological choices

Abstract

Objective: In this essay, we address the significance of aligning theoretical and methodological choices in quantitative research, aiming to demystify complex concepts in panel data analysis, specifically the choice between fixed and random effects.

Method: Presented in an essay format with a didactic approach, we elucidate these concepts in clear and comprehensible language, rendering them accessible to a broad audience.

Main Results: We emphasize the importance of theory and methodological choices, including applied statistical techniques, in panel data analysis. We examine the need for a consistent relationship between selected theory and methodology, as well as the importance of grounding intended effects in formulated hypotheses. By discussing the challenges faced by researchers who do not adequately align their theoretical and methodological choices, we seek to demonstrate that such decisions lead to inconsistent and potentially misleading results. We underscore the significance of selecting appropriate estimators that align with developed theory and proposed hypotheses.

Relevance/ Originality: We hope this article serves as a valuable guide for graduate students in Administration and experienced researchers who are acquainting themselves with panel data analysis, assisting them in producing more robust and reliable research.

Theoretical/ Methodological Contributions: This essay significantly contributes to the field of research in Administration by highlighting the importance of coherent alignment between theoretical and methodological choices in quantitative research, with a specific focus on panel data analysis and the selection between fixed and random effects.

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bliese, P. D., Schepker, D. J., Essman, S. M., & Ployhart, R. E. (2020). Bridging Methodological Divides Between Macro- and Microresearch: Endogeneity and Methods for Panel Data. Journal of Management, 46(1), 70-99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319868016

Certo, S. T., Withers, M. C., & Semadeni, M. (2017). A tale of two effects: Using longitudinal data to compare within- and between-firm effects. Strategic Management Journal, 38(7), 1536-1556. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2586

Greene, J. C. (2008). Is Mixed Methods Social Inquiry a Distinctive Methodology? Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(1), 7-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807309969

Greene, W. H. (2003). Econometric Analysis. In Pearson Educationearson Education.

Lana, J., Gama, M. A. B., Bandeira-de-Mello, R., & Marcon, R. (2018). O tempo como legitimador da causa: Implicações temporais em pesquisas de Administração. Revista Alcance, 25(1), 106-119. https://doi.org/10.14210/alcance.v25n1(Jan/Abr).p106-119

Li, X., & Wibbens, P. D. (2021). Broken Effects? How to Reduce False Positives in Panel Regressions. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3694931

Martins, H. C. (2019). A importância da ciência aberta (open science) na pesquisa em Administração. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 24(1), 1-2. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2020190380

Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (2003). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford University Press.

Verbeek, M. (2007). A guide to modern econometrics (2ª ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. MIT Press.

Published

2023-12-07

How to Cite

Meneghini, E. M. P., & Português, J. (2023). ESSAY: CHOOSING BETWEEN FIXED AND RANDOM EFFECTS IN PANEL DATA ANALYSIS. Internext - International Business and Management Review, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.18568/internext.v19i1.768