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

From |
"Maarten Buis" <M.Buis@fsw.vu.nl> |

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

Subject |
RE: st: RE: Graphing ploynomial relationships after a regression |

Date |
Wed, 19 Oct 2005 11:19:02 +0200 |

I find doing these graphs `by hand' particularly useful when polynomials are combined with interactionterms. This method closely conforms to the way I make sense about those models myself: write the model down, and work through various contrasts. Of course it means more typing, but I find that I make less mistakes that way because this link between the syntax and the way I think about these models. Ultimately, I think it is just what you are used to doing (and how you were taught to do this stuff, I had a tough master who deliberately decided not to use Stata because it made this stuff too easy...) Alternatively, since Tinna intended to use this after a 2sls model, I could imagine a polynomial occurring in an indirect effect. This too would be a case where I would prefer to first write it out, and the results would closely conform to the syntax in the do-file. It is true that making graphs with complex models requires careful though, but I find it is very difficult to really explain the results without them. Interactions and indirect effects with a polynomial in it, are cases in point. On 10/18/05, Nick Cox <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk> wrote: > As a model gets more complex, it is less likely that it can > be presented by a graph. y = polynomial(x) is one exception, but > in practice even cubics over a whole range are unlikely to be > useful, in my experience. > > But, more to the point, a model gets more complex, you have _more_ > to type as you spell out each term as _b[varname] * > varname. -predict- does this all for you. And this is error-prone. > > Other than the occasional pedagogic advantage of underlining > what is being done, i.e. plugging estimates into a model > formula, I can't understand your preference here. > * * 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/

**Follow-Ups**:**st: mrunning size***From:*Fred Wolfe <fwolfe@arthritis-research.org>

- Prev by Date:
**st: xtreg - coefficients and cluster effect** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: Huge dataset** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: RE: Graphing ploynomial relationships after a regression** - Next by thread:
**st: mrunning size** - Index(es):

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