Bookmark and Share

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]

Re: st: Interpretation of categorical independent variable


From   Meng Zhao <mrzm_www@yahoo.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: Interpretation of categorical independent variable
Date   Fri, 10 Sep 2010 02:36:34 -0700 (PDT)

Very clear! Thanks.


--- On Fri, 9/10/10, Maarten buis <maartenbuis@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> From: Maarten buis <maartenbuis@yahoo.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: st: Interpretation of categorical independent variable
> To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
> Date: Friday, September 10, 2010, 9:23 AM
> --- On Fri, 10/9/10, Meng Zhao
> wrote:
> > I use a three-category ID to predict a binomial
> dependent
> > variable. I included dummy variables for the first
> two
> > categories in the model. The result is:
> >           
> >             Odds Ratio 
> >    p
> > Category 1:  116.45     
> > 0.000   
> > Category 2:  17.76   
> >    0.000
> > 
> > Is the following interpretion correct?
> > 
> > 1.compared to category 3, being category 1 increases
> the
> > Odds Ratio by 116.45 for DV to happen (whatever it
> > represents).
> > 
> > 2.compared to category 3, being category 2 increases
> the
> > Odds Ratio by 17.76. 
> > 
> > 3.So category 1 has a stronger effect on DV than
> category
> > 2, and category 2 is stronger than category 3
> 
> Not quite, an odds ratio is a ratio of odds, while the way
> you 
> formulated the results suggests that it is a difference.
> So
> the odds a the expected number of successes for every
> failure,
> and the odds ratio is the ratio by which this odds
> changes.
> 
> When interpreting the odds ratios, I find it helpful to
> have
> the baseline odds. Unfortunately, Stata supresses this by
> default, but there is a trick you can use to get it
> displayed,
> which I learned from (Newson 2003).
> 
> Consider the example below:
> 
> *--------------- begin example ------------------
> sysuse auto, clear
> recode rep78 1/2=3
> 
> gen byte baseline = 1
> 
> sum price if !missing(foreign, rep78), meanonly
> gen c_price = price - r(mean)
> 
> logit foreign i.rep78 c_price baseline, noconst or
> *--------------- end example ----------------------
> (For more on examples I sent to the Statalist see: 
> http://www.maartenbuis.nl/example_faq )
> 
> The coefficient reported for baseline is the odds of
> being foreign when one belongs to category 3 of rep78
> and one has an average price (I created c_price to be
> 0 when the price is average). So for this type of car
> we expect to find 0.08 foreign car for every domestic
> car. This odds of being a foreing car changes by a 
> factor 12 (i.e. (12 - 1)*100% = 1100%) when the car
> belongs to category 4, and by a factor 56 (i.e. 5500%)
> when the car belongs to category 5.
> 
> To get more feeling for what that means I often find it
> useful to look at the odds directly. To get these
> you can leave the baseline category in your model and 
> leave the constant (in our case the "variable" 
> baseline) out. In this case the coefficients of your 
> categories are now the odds of being a foreign car 
> within each category for an average priced car. 
> 
> So for category 3 we already knew that that was 
> 0.08 foreign cars for every domestic car.
> 
> For category 4 cars the odds is 1 foreign car for every 
> domestic car (which is fortunately 12 times larger than 
> the odds for category 3 cars, so we are getting exactly
> the same results as in our previous model). 
> 
> For category 5 cars we expect to find 4.5 foreign cars 
> for every domestic car (which is 56 times larger than 
> the odds for category 3 cars). 
> 
> *-------------- begin example -----------------
> logit foreign ibn.rep78 c_price, noconst or
> di exp(_b[4.rep78])/exp(_b[3bn.rep78])
> di exp(_b[5.rep78])/exp(_b[3bn.rep78])
> *---------------- end example ------------------
> (For more on examples I sent to the Statalist see: 
> http://www.maartenbuis.nl/example_faq )
> 
> Hope this helps,
> Maarten
> 
> Roger Newson (2003) "Stata tip 1: The eform() option of 
> regress". The Stata Journal, 3(4): 445.
> <http://www.stata-journal.com/article.html?article=st0054>
> 
> --------------------------
> Maarten L. Buis
> Institut fuer Soziologie
> Universitaet Tuebingen
> Wilhelmstrasse 36
> 72074 Tuebingen
> Germany
> 
> http://www.maartenbuis.nl
> --------------------------
> 
> 
>       
> 
> *
> *   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   |   Site index