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

From |
Joseph Coveney <jcoveney@bigplanet.com> |

To |
Thomas Cornelißen <cornelissen@mbox.iqw.uni-hannover.de>, Statalist <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |

Subject |
Re: st: bivariate ordered probit / ordinal probit - ctd. |

Date |
Mon, 07 Nov 2005 15:24:23 +0900 |

This fleshes out the first response a little. To answer Thomas Cornelißen's question regarding the discrepancy between coefficients fitted by -biprobit- and those by -gllamm-: the coefficients will differ by a scale factor of sqrt(1 / (1 + random effect variance). If Thomas multiplies the coefficients obtained from -gllamm- by this scale factor, then results from -biprobit- will match those from -gllamm-. This is explained by Leonardo Grilli and Carla Rampichini whose working paper's URL I gave in the first response. I've illustrated this in the do-file below. The do-file shows the use of both -xtprobit- (which is faster) and -gllamm-. Thomas was interested in rho, and -xtprobit- also gives rho directly, whereas with -gllamm- you need to calculate rho from the outputted parameter estimate as described in the first reply. The illustration should generalize to ordered probit regression with -reoprob- and -gllamm , link(oprobit)- using minus the first cut point for the intercept (if I recall Stata's parameterization correctly). Note that -xtprobit- constrains rho to be positive. If you have a negative tetrachoric correlation coefficient for the two measures, then you can use -gllamm- with an equation for the random effect as described in the working paper by Leonardo Grilli & Carla Rampichini. If you use -xtprobit-, you'll need to flip the responses for one of them and note the change of sign in the coeffients, including rho. Joseph Coveney set more off drawnorm predictor latent0 latent1, /// corr(1 0.5 0.5 \ 0.5 1 0.5 \ 0.5 0.5 1) /// n(250) seed(`=date("2005-11-07", "ymd")') clear forvalues i = 0/1 { generate byte manifest`i' = 0 quietly replace manifest`i' = manifest`i' + (latent`i' > 0) drop latent`i' } generate int row = _n biprobit (manifest0 predictor) (manifest1 predictor), nolog quietly reshape long manifest, i(row) j(measure) generate float interaction = measure * predictor xtprobit manifest predictor measure interaction, /// i(row) intmethod(aghermite) intpoints(30) nolog scalar scale_factor = sqrt( 1 / (1 + exp(_b[/lnsig2u]))) display _b[predictor] * scalar(scale_factor) display _b[_cons] * scalar(scale_factor) display (_b[predictor] + _b[interaction]) * scalar(scale_factor) display (_b[_cons] + _b[measure]) * scalar(scale_factor) gllamm manifest predictor measure interaction, /// i(row) family(binomial) link(probit) nip(30) adapt nolog scalar scale_factor = sqrt( 1 / (1 + _b[row1:_cons]^2)) display _b[predictor] * scalar(scale_factor) display _b[_cons] * scalar(scale_factor) display (_b[predictor] + _b[interaction]) * scalar(scale_factor) display (_b[_cons] + _b[measure]) * scalar(scale_factor) display _b[row1:_cons]^2 / (1 + _b[row1:_cons]^2) exit * * 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**:**Re: st: bivariate ordered probit / ordinal probit - ctd.***From:*Thomas Cornelißen <cornelissen@mbox.iqw.uni-hannover.de>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: a question about areg with robust versus areg with robust and cluster options** - Next by Date:
**st: Residuals, using xtreg** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: bivariate ordered probit / ordinal probit - ctd.** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: bivariate ordered probit / ordinal probit - ctd.** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2015 StataCorp LP | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |