Using STATA package, the following regression was obtained by OLS reg lvage educ educ south south exper tenure Source Model Residual 55 Sumber of oba $35 (5.929) 41.43 30.2039314 135.452352 56.04078428 929 145004469 Proh F 0.0000 -squared 0.1829 Ady R-squared 0.1779 Total 165.656203 934 177342100 Foot MSE lvage educ educ south Coef. Std. Err. t Piti [9ss Conf. Intervall 0634105 0271122 outh exper tenure cons -.4961402 0074799 0122772 -165512 8.48 0154637 .0033213 0.000 0.027 -3.00 0.003 4.66 0.000 0407392 0780979 0030179 0512065 -.8209609 -1713194 0009454 0128548 5.700469 .0025557 5.03 0.000 .0078392 1209412 47.13 0.000 0178704 5.93719 5.46312 where wage is the log of average hourly earnings (in $): educ is years of education; exper is years of experience tenure is years with current employer south is dummy variable that takes a value of one if the worker was living in south and zero otherwise. Instructions a) Interpret the coefficient on tenure. Is it economically large? Explain the coefficient on the interaction term between educ and south b) is the interaction educ, south statistically significant at 5% level? Based on the test result, should the interaction educ, south be included as an explanatory variable in the model? The following result is obtainted by White test. Is there enough evidence to conclude that the related equation suffers a problem of heteroscedasticity? Explain. What are potential consequences of heteroskedasticity for OLS? estat inteat, white White's teat for Ros homoskedasticity againes Hai unrestricted heteroskedasticity 53.71 Froh chi2- 0.0000 Cameron & Trivedi's decomposition of IM-test Source chiz P Heteroskedasticity 53.71 26 0.0000 Skewness Rust 2.34 2.92 0.7597 0.0073 Total 50.97 0.0000