Statalist The Stata Listserver


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

Re: st: gllamm output


From   "Dari Sylvester" <dsylvester@pacific.edu>
To   <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>
Subject   Re: st: gllamm output
Date   Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:36:29 -0700

Christian,

Thank you.  Yes - you are correct that county id should be the level 2
identifier.  If I want to have "count" as a level 2 independent
variable, would I have the following:

eqs count:  cons
gllamm volrel2 schmooze socialtrust civpartr group coll married healthr
relatendr, i(countyid) family(bin) link(logit) 

When I ran that, it seemed to converge, but with a condition number of
584!  If I am correct, that's not necessarily a good sign.

Thanks for your help, Christian.

Best,
Dari
Dari E. Sylvester
Assistant Professor, Political Science
Senior Fellow, Jacoby Center for Public Service and Civic Leadership
University of the Pacific
Stockton, CA 95211
Phone: (209) 946-2007
Fax:     (209) 946-2318
>>> christian.ganser@soziologie.uni-muenchen.de 06/12/06 1:33 AM >>>
Only answering questions 1 and 2.

Are you sure you don't want to fit the following:

gllamm DV V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8 count, i(YOUR COUNTY-ID) family(bin)
link(logit) 

The number of volunteer organizations in the county is an independent 
variable, isn't it? You used it as the county-identifier, so your model 
doesn't make much sense, I think.

Question 2: Using the latent-response formulation of the logistic 
regression model, y*i=b0+b1x1i+...+ei, it is assumed that ei has a 
logistic distribution with mean zero and variance pi^2/3=3.29.

Dari Sylvester wrote:
> I used the gllamm command for a multilevel analysis that estimates the
> dichotomous outcome of volunteering or not volunteering based on
> individual characteristics (level 1) and the number of volunteer
> organizations in the county in which one lives (level 2).  
> There are explanatory variables at the level of individuals from V1
> through V8.
> I have no particular equation to estimate for the county level.  
> I ran the following:
>
>  
> gllamm DV V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8, i(count) family(bin) link(logit) 
>  
> **Where DV is the dependent variable, V1-V8 are explanatory variables
> for the individual level, COUNT is the count of organizations in the
> county level.  **
>  
> I received the following output:
>  
> number of level 1 units = 19395
> number of level 2 units = 137
>  
> Condition Number = 481.48689
>  
> gllamm model
>  
> log likelihood = -8947.353
>  
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>      DV      |      Coef.   Std. Err.      z    P>|z|     [95% Conf.
> Interval]
>
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
>     V1       |   .0052359   .0003777    13.86   0.000     .0044956   
> .0059763
>  V2          |   .6474295   .0736646     8.79   0.000     .5030495   
> .7918094
>     V3       |   1.544726   .0851626    18.14   0.000      1.37781   
> 1.711642
>        V4    |   .2398346   .0198328    12.09   0.000      .200963   
> .2787061
>       V5     |   .4001724   .0403935     9.91   0.000     .3210025   
> .4793423
>      V6      |    .386209   .0383842    10.06   0.000     .3109772   
> .4614407
>      V7      |   .6155165   .0775643     7.94   0.000     .4634934   
> .7675397
>    V8        |   3.722145   .0636431    58.48   0.000     3.597407   
> 3.846883
>        _cons |   -5.60294   .1000996   -55.97   0.000    -5.799131  
> -5.406748
>
> Variances and covariances of random effects
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>  
> ***level 2 (count)
>  
>     var(1): .01434088 (.00613062)
>  
> Questions:
>  
> 1. I'm not sure why the condition number is so high - leads me to
> believe I've made an error in how I've set up the gllamm model.
> 2. Why isn't level 1 variance reported?
> 3. How does the interaction between levels (i.e. the individual nested
> in numbers of county organizations) differ in this multilevel
estimation
> from running a probit with interaction terms added for each of the
> individual level variables of interest multiplied by the number of
> county organizations?  In other words, running: 
>  
> probit DV V1 V2 V3 V1*COUNT V2*COUNT V3*COUNT
>  
> Thank you kindly,
> D. Sylvester
>  
>
> Dari E. Sylvester
> Assistant Professor, Political Science
> Senior Fellow, Jacoby Center for Public Service and Civic Leadership
> University of the Pacific
> Stockton, CA 95211
> Phone: (209) 946-2007
> Fax:     (209) 946-2318
> *
> *   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/

*
*   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/



© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index