[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

From |
"Jitian Sheu" <jtsheu@bu.edu> |

To |
<statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |

Subject |
st: Re: Constrained multinominal logit problem |

Date |
Wed, 30 Apr 2003 09:56:19 -0400 |

For McFadden's Conditional logit model, the right command should be - clogit-, instead of - mlogit- these two model are slightly different. you can see manual or any microeconometric book for a description jt ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mathiassen, Astrid" <astrid.mathiassen@ssb.no> To: <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 7:28 AM Subject: st: Constrained multinominal logit problem > Hey, > I am doing a multinominal discrete choice analysis (McFadden's conditional logit model). My dataset contains aggregated information. My dependent variables are the number of times each of the 50 alternatives (of cars) were chosen. The corresponding attributes are, Zjr, (where j refer to alternativ and r to attribute f.ex. price). > For this procedure I use mlogit with 48 constraints. The constraints imply that the coefficient for each attribute should be equal, hence bjr=b1r for all j. > I have redefined the attribute-vector so that Zj*=Zj-Z1. Hence I use alternative 1 as the base category (reference). > I am a first time user of STATA and are a bit insecure on how this work. In particular, I do not understand the output report. The puzzle is that in the output report ONE, and the last listed elements in the attribute vectors, is dropped for each alternative - except for the last alternative where the estimates are reported for all elements of the attribute vector. This also happens in the special where attribute vector contains only one element. Hence, it cannot be explained by interedependency between the elements of the attribute vectors. > Could you help me understand what's going on? Or could you indicate an alternative procedure? > > Thank you very much in advance > best regards, > astrid > > My model statement look like this (number refer to the number of times the alternative was chosen): > mlogit depvar attribute1 attribute2 etc. [aweight=number], noconstant constr(2-49) basecategory (1) > > > > > > > > * > * For searches and help try: > * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html > * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq > * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ > * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**References**:**st: Constrained multinominal logit problem***From:*"Mathiassen, Astrid" <astrid.mathiassen@ssb.no>

- Prev by Date:
**st: Why stcox is not able to calculate baseline hazard?** - Next by Date:
**st: Re: problems with using ineqdeco to calculate inequality measures** - Previous by thread:
**st: Constrained multinominal logit problem** - Next by thread:
**st: Why stcox is not able to calculate baseline hazard?** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2016 StataCorp LP | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |