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

From |
"MacDonald, John" <johnmac@rand.org> |

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

Subject |
st: RE: RE: RE: RE: Negative Binomial Models |

Date |
Wed, 13 Oct 2004 19:42:27 -0700 |

I was speaking to freq in bin. For example a distribution of homicide counts in 200 cities that ranges from 0 to 350. Thanks for the clarification. I'll also check on Scott Long's book. I like the idea of comparing estimation methods. Unfortunately there is a trend in the social sciences for reviewers to assume one has to use a specific model - because it's the new convention - even when it is unnecessary. Criminology and sociology are plagued by this trend. -----Original Message----- From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu]On Behalf Of Nick Cox Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 5:22 PM To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Subject: st: RE: RE: RE: Negative Binomial Models Are we talking about #bins or max(freq in bin) ? Nick n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu]On Behalf Of MacDonald, > John > Sent: 14 October 2004 00:58 > To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > Subject: st: RE: RE: Negative Binomial Models > > > Thanks Nick. > > John > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu]On Behalf Of Nick Cox > Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 4:44 PM > To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > Subject: st: RE: Negative Binomial Models > > > Should or should not? > > I'd like to hear the grounds for that. I find it > difficult to believe that any such criterion tenet > aquam. You should use a negative binomial distribution > whenever fitted probabilities are close to observed > probabilities. > > The underlying frequencies are not that germane. > But if the total number of individuals in the sample > is large, at least some cell frequencies are likely > to be. In fact, to get a good handle on probabilities > in the tail, a very large sample is a really good idea. > > I'm interested in comments on this. If you type > > . ssc type nbfit.hlp > > there's a worked example in which the peak frequency > was 807. > > Nick > n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Nick Cox > > Sent: 14 October 2004 00:38 > > To: 'statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu' > > Subject: RE: Negative Binomial Models > > > > > > > > > > Nick > > n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > > > [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu]On Behalf Of > MacDonald, > > > John > > > Sent: 14 October 2004 00:23 > > > To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > > > Subject: st: Negative Binomial Models > > > > > > > > > Is there a maximum number of counts one should not exceed > > > when using the negative binomial model? Even if there is a > > > adjustment for exposure (e.g., rate of homicides in a city). > > > I have a data set with over 200 homicides in some cities and > > > I saw a reference in an article of American Journal of > > > Sociology to Maddala's 1977 econometrics textbook that said > > > you should exceed 50 counts. Is this true? > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------- > > > > > > This email message is for the sole use of the intended > > > recipient(s) and > > > may contain privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, > > > disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not > > the intended > > > recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and > > > destroy all copies > > > of the original message. > > > > > > > > > > > > * > > > * 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/ > > -------------------- > > This email message is for the sole use of the intended > recipient(s) and > may contain privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, > disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended > recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and > destroy all copies > of the original message. > > > > * > * 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/ -------------------- This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. * * 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/

- Prev by Date:
**st: RE: Re: Save -tabulate- output as matrix** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: RE: Multicollinerity test in IV regression** - Previous by thread:
**st: RE: Re: Save -tabulate- output as matrix** - Next by thread:
**st: Re: Problem of using XI** - Index(es):

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