[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

From |
"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk> |

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

Subject |
RE: st: RE: Converting a continuous var into a binary var |

Date |
Tue, 7 Jul 2009 19:45:29 +0100 |

I think it's up to Pancho to say whether he has taken any point or not. More importantly, nobody "owns" a thread, although people who start one carry some responsibility to wrap it up. A thread can digress, split, morph depending on others' thoughts, and that's typically not a bad thing. I don't think anybody has made an issue of how _brief_ the original post was. Pancho asked a question and then stated that his real question was different. I don't think any of the subsequent comments were surprising, given that admission -- nor, I submit, is it going to be interesting or useful to recycle that discussion much further. Nick n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk Martin Weiss There seem to be two "strands" in this thread, and it is not always clear to me whether posters are referring to one of them - or both. The first is chiding Pancho for being too brief in his initial post, which admittedly is not a good thing, but still: Others have gotten away with it before on this list. The second is a critique of his research methods, and I would say: "point taken" on Pancho`s part... Nick Cox I am happy that any Stata Journal columns of mine are useful, but that really wasn't the point I was making. Dichotomising continuous variables throws away information. Usually that's a bad, or at least a dubious, idea. Pancho Villa On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Nick Cox<n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk> wrote: > That aside, the mechanics of how to do this have been thoroughly > ventilated, but its meaning has not been. Yes, I'm reading the column on *for*, which seems like written with me in mind. I'm one of those who've postponed learning about macros, etc. * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**References**:**st: Converting a continuous var into a binary var***From:*Pancho Villa <panchovillainnyc@gmail.com>

**st: RE: Converting a continuous var into a binary var***From:*"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>

**Re: st: RE: Converting a continuous var into a binary var***From:*Pancho Villa <panchovillainnyc@gmail.com>

**RE: st: RE: Converting a continuous var into a binary var***From:*"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>

**Re: st: RE: Converting a continuous var into a binary var***From:*Pancho Villa <panchovillainnyc@gmail.com>

**RE: st: RE: Converting a continuous var into a binary var***From:*"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>

**RE: st: RE: Converting a continuous var into a binary var***From:*"Martin Weiss" <martin.weiss1@gmx.de>

- Prev by Date:
**st: RE: How does HLM compare to Stata?** - Next by Date:
**st: var already defined problem** - Previous by thread:
**RE: st: RE: Converting a continuous var into a binary var** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: RE: Converting a continuous var into a binary var** - Index(es):

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