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 |
Sarah Elizabeth Edgington <sedging@ucla.edu> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: interpretation of squared term |

Date |
Thu, 26 Aug 2010 12:55:59 -0700 |

.

-Sarah At 12:39 PM 8/26/2010, David Bai wrote:

Thank you, Maarten.I include the squared term because this year variable might benon-linearly related to the outcome. Is there an easier way toroughly interpret the year effect? I do not want to go deeper tohave an exact interpretation of the two year variables. E.g., whatdoes a negative coefficient for a squared term mean? Thank you.

* * 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: interpretation of squared term***From:*Maarten buis <maartenbuis@yahoo.co.uk>

**References**:**Re: st: interpretation of squared term***From:*Maarten buis <maartenbuis@yahoo.co.uk>

**Re: st: interpretation of squared term***From:*David Bai <db555@mail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: interpretation of squared term** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: RE: I wish I'd known that -** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: interpretation of squared term** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: interpretation of squared term** - Index(es):