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, statalist.org is already up and running.


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

Re: st: Some help on coding the categorical variable


From   prakash singh <prakashbhu@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: Some help on coding the categorical variable
Date   Fri, 13 May 2011 09:46:06 +0530

Thanks Nick for your comment.


Prakash

On 5/11/11, Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com> wrote:
> This depends on what your "analysis" is, which is completely
> unspecified. If you wish to produce equations with your categorical
> variables included, then the second coding may produce equations that
> are simpler to interpret, but for most purposes I see little practical
> difference here.
>
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 8:12 AM, prakash singh <prakashbhu@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In my analysis I am having few categorical variables where the code
>> for the categorical variable is: 1 for increase, 2 for no change and 3
>> for decrease. Now I need suggestion that whether I should change the
>> code to -1 for decrease 0 for no change and 1 for increase or I should
>> go ahead with same coding for the empirical exercise.
> *
> *   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