Notice: On March 31, it was **announced** that Statalist is moving from an email list to a **forum**. The old list will shut down at the end of May, and its replacement, **statalist.org** is already up and running.

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

From |
Rosie Chen <jiarongchen2002@yahoo.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: RE: Interpretation of quadratic terms |

Date |
Mon, 8 Mar 2010 13:15:51 -0800 (PST) |

Thanks a lot for the advice, Rodolphe. I found several resources that suggest centering before creating quadratic terms. Below is one example. http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/mult_pkg/faq/general/curves.htm Rosie ----- Original Message ---- From: Rodolphe Desbordes <rodolphe.desbordes@strath.ac.uk> To: "statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu" <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> Sent: Mon, March 8, 2010 1:42:31 PM Subject: st: RE: Interpretation of quadratic terms Dear Rosie, If the coefficient on X is positive and the coefficient on X^2 is negative, that suggests that X has a positive effect on Y until a turning point is reached, e.g. 1.3/(2*0.2)=3.25. Beyond that value, X has a negative impact on Y. Rodolphe PS: I am not sure that `centering' reduces multicollinearity. -----Original Message----- From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Rosie Chen Sent: lundi 8 mars 2010 18:28 To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Subject: st: Interpretation of quadratic terms Dear all, I have a question regarding how to interpret quadratic terms in regression, and would appreciate your help very much. Because the non-linear nature of the relationship between X and Y; I need to include quadratic terms in the model. To avoid multicollinearity problem with the original variable and its quadratic term, I centered the variable first (X) and then created the square term (Xsq). The model with the quadratic term (Xsq) was proved to be significantly better. Suppose the output is like the following (both coefficients are significant), how to interpret the results? The two signs are opposite. Could anyone provide some insight? Thank you very much in advance! --Rosie y= a + 1.3*X - 0.2*Xsq + e * * 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/

**Follow-Ups**:**RE: st: RE: Interpretation of quadratic terms***From:*Rodolphe Desbordes <rodolphe.desbordes@strath.ac.uk>

**RE: st: RE: Interpretation of quadratic terms***From:*"Lachenbruch, Peter" <Peter.Lachenbruch@oregonstate.edu>

**References**:**st: Interpretation of quadratic terms***From:*Rosie Chen <jiarongchen2002@yahoo.com>

**st: RE: Interpretation of quadratic terms***From:*Rodolphe Desbordes <rodolphe.desbordes@strath.ac.uk>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: "brute force" procedure for ml init** - Next by Date:
**RE: st: RE: Interpretation of quadratic terms** - Previous by thread:
**st: RE: Interpretation of quadratic terms** - Next by thread:
**RE: st: RE: Interpretation of quadratic terms** - Index(es):