Statalist


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

RE: st: xtmelogit - a very strange treatment of different levels


From   "Martin Weiss" <martin.weiss1@gmx.de>
To   <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>
Subject   RE: st: xtmelogit - a very strange treatment of different levels
Date   Mon, 15 Feb 2010 20:38:25 +0100

<>

" Note that the order of the specification of random effects in -xtmelogit-
is "opposite" of that in -gllamm-.  "


As [XT] makes clear at the top of page 249.


HTH
Martin


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
[mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Cohen, Elan
Sent: Montag, 15. Februar 2010 20:34
To: 'statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu'
Subject: RE: st: xtmelogit - a very strange treatment of different levels

Note that the order of the specification of random effects in -xtmelogit- is
"opposite" of that in -gllamm-.  I believe, in this case,  you want:

xi: xtmelogit depvar indepvars || householdID: || personID:

This would also explain why you're getting the same number of units on both
levels.

HTH,

- Elan


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu 
> [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of 
> Dimitrije Tišma
> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 16:20
> To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
> Subject: Re: st: xtmelogit - a very strange treatment of 
> different levels
> 
> The command was a quite typical -xtmelogit-. Persons are nested within
> households, i.e. they do not change the HH number over time. As the
> first step I wanted only random intercepts for person and household
> level, so I wrote the following:
> 
> xi: xtmelogit depvar indepvars || personID: || householdID:
> 
> I did not save the results, I am afraid, but I remember well what was
> puzzling. The group statistics was strange to me, as it showed the
> same number of units on both levels. Obviously, it considered the
> number of person-household combinations as number of households and I
> don't know why. Furthermore, while when using -gllamm- the results
> change considerably by introducing another level (household), here
> they were practically identical to those when using logit. Thanks in
> advance for the answer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2010/2/12 Airey, David C <david.airey@vanderbilt.edu>:
> > .
> >
> > Show your commands and results.
> >
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >> I am working with some household panel dataset and in 
> order to check
> >> for random effects I did both gllamm and xtmelogit 
> regression. While
> >> in gllamm everything worked fine, xtmelogit did not deal 
> with the two
> >> levels (individuals and households) the way I expected. Namely, it
> >> reports the same number of units on both levels (!) and 
> practically no
> >> random effects either level. Also, the results are practically
> >> identical to the results when "normal" logit regression is 
> used. Does
> >> anyone know what this could be about? Thanks a lot.
> >>
> >> Dimitrije
> >
> > *
> > *   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/
> >
> 
> *
> *   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/
> 
> 
*
*   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/


*
*   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/



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