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

From |
Steven Samuels <sjhsamuels@earthlink.net> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: ttest or xtmelogit? |

Date |
Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:10:12 -0400 |

Not mentioned in -transint- is the variance-stabilizing property of the angular transformation: it has asymptotic variance 1/4n, which is not a function of p (Anscombe, 1948). If the observed proportion is r/ n, Anscombe showed that the arcsine of [(r + 3/8)/(n + 3/4)]^.5 is even better at stabilizing the variance, for moderate sample size. The second version has variance 1/(4n + 2).

The arcsine-transformation used to be recommended because transformed proportions could be analyzed via standard ANOVA programs. I once found it useful in a variance components analysis. The 'error' variance was a mixture of a between-sample and within sample (binomial) variance. With the arcsine transformation, I could subtract out the part attributable to binomial variation.

-Steve

FJ Anscombe 1948. The transformation of Poisson, Binomial, and negative-binomial data. Biometrika 35:246-254

On Mar 10, 2008, at 6:02 PM, Nick Cox wrote:

By arcsin I guess you mean the angular transformation (arcsine of square

root).

Its use seems to have faded dramatically in recent years.

Tukey showed that this is very close to p^0.41 - (1 - p)^0.41. That

makes it weaker

than the logit. My guess is that it would be an unusual dataset in which

the angular

was much better than leaving data as is and also much better than the

logit. It could happen,

but it seems to be rare.

The Tukey reference is given in -transint- from SSC.

Nick

n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk

David Airey

Maybe I should not have said it was pilot data! I won't disagree, but

when cluster number is too small (< 20) to invoke xtgee or xtmelogit

on the observed yes/no data, or glm on the summary statistics with

binomial family and logit link, what do you do? It seems to me there

is a sample size between 10 and 30 clusters of yes/no data that may be

better suited to some of the older approaches like arcsin transformed

proportions and then ttest or ANOVA/regress. I guess that was my

question.

*

* 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/

**Follow-Ups**:**RE: st: ttest or xtmelogit?***From:*"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>

**References**:**st: ttest or xtmelogit?***From:*tiago.pereira@incor.usp.br

**Re: st: ttest or xtmelogit?***From:*David Airey <david.airey@Vanderbilt.Edu>

**RE: st: ttest or xtmelogit?***From:*"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: booststraping in two stage models** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: booststraping in two stage models** - Previous by thread:
**RE: st: ttest or xtmelogit?** - Next by thread:
**RE: st: ttest or xtmelogit?** - Index(es):

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