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 on April 23, and its replacement, is already up and running.

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

Re: st: Spss's aggregate vs stata's collapse.

From (Brendan Halpin)
Subject   Re: st: Spss's aggregate vs stata's collapse.
Date   Wed, 13 Apr 2011 10:05:09 +0100

On Wed, Apr 13 2011, Amadou DIALLO wrote:

> Hi,
> I am translating spss commands to stata and have trouble with different outputs.
> Results are different after "aggregate" for ceb (children ever born).

If the two files are exactly identical at the collapse/aggregate point
(and that's worth verifying, as the generate/if and compute/if commands
will not necessarily be identical in the case of missing values on the
right hand side), I would guess it has to do with SPSS and Stata
handling weights differently in this situation. You could test this by
re-running the manipulation without weights. Note the
"negative/zero/missing weight" warning you get with SPSS. 

If that is the problem, one possible workaround is to handle the weights
yourself: multiply ceb by the weight variable, and sum the result in the
-collapse- statement. 

Brendan Halpin,   Department of Sociology,   University of Limerick,   Ireland
Tel: w +353-61-213147  f +353-61-202569  h +353-61-338562;  Room F1-009 x 3147    ULSociology on Facebook:         twitter:@ULSociology
*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2015 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index