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

RE: st: gologit2

From   "Verkuilen, Jay" <>
To   <>
Subject   RE: st: gologit2
Date   Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:54:40 -0400

Maarten buis wrote:

>>If you are unsure, than go through the logic of testing: formulate the
null-hypothesis. <snip> <<

The one addendum I would add is this: If the formal test says reject the
null but the resulting violation is "small", you may want to think twice
about tossing out the proportional odds assumption. Such violations are
often found by capitalizing on chance and wouldn't replicate (instead
you'll find some other violation elsewhere). It may be worth it to
assess these kinds of assumptions on a calibration sample and have a
randomly selected holdout sample for later validation of your model. 


*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2017 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index