I've used both R and Stata for a long time, but these days I use Stata much more frequently than R. While R is useful for some kinds of graphics (especially threedimensional graphics) and some statistical procedures (for example, finite mixture models), in general I prefer Stata as the goto statistical program. The reasons are clear: Stata has superior help files for almost all ado files, Stata graphics are excellent (even contour plots are available in Stata), cleaning data is a breeze in Stata but awkward in R, labeling data is much efficient in Stata (in fact, as far as I can tell R does not allow for labeling variable names, while Stata allows for labeling levels of a variable, the variable itself, and the data set), and for many procedures Stata's syntax is much more parsimonious than R's.
Yet, R is worth learning because the 3D graphics available are often extremely useful for exploring the data, and there will certainly be cases in which R will have statistical procedures that are unavailable or cumbersome in Stata (Bayesian analyses and finite mixture models come to mind, for example).
Saturday, March 03, 2012
Blog Archive

▼
2012
(56)

▼
March
(29)
 Physics Envy
 Irving Louis Horowitz
 MyPersonality
 Why are Economists so (Consistently) Led Astray Ab...
 Popularity of Programming Languages
 Big Science and Sociology
 Statistical Lexicon
 McKinsey on Big Data
 Inequality: Everyone's Thinking About It
 Universal Limits in HighDimensional Statistics
 Rethinking Tragedy and Success
 Why Inequality Matters
 Inequality "Crisis" of Marriage
 Corporate Culture Revisited
 Misc. Links
 MIT Inequality Talk
 Scatter Plot Matrix in R
 Taxes and Inequality
 3D Scatter Plots Redux
 Checking Weather in Stata
 Is Everything Culture?
 Ternary (or Triaxial) Plots
 Causality and Ethnography
 The Mystery of PowerLaw Distributions
 Visualizing a Correlation Table
 Why Models are Not Data
 R versus Stata Redux
 Culture and Poverty
 Values and Politics

▼
March
(29)