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]

AW: st: MI estimate error


From   "Michael Beck" <michael.beck@edu.unibe.ch>
To   <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>
Subject   AW: st: MI estimate error
Date   Fri, 27 May 2011 16:19:31 +0200

Dear Maarten

Thank You very much, actually there was something wrong with my recoding of
the mentioned variable. 

No everything works perfect, thanks for the quick help!

Kind Regards
Michael



_____________________________
Dipl.-Soz. Michael Beck
Institut für Erziehungswissenschaft
Abteilung Bildungssoziologie
Muesmattstr. 27
CH-3012 Bern
 
Tel.: +41 (0) 31 631 53 54
Fax: +41 (0) 31 631 53 52
michael.beck@edu.unibe.ch
www.abs.unibe.ch
 
 

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
[mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] Im Auftrag von Maarten Buis
Gesendet: Freitag, 27. Mai 2011 15:56
An: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Betreff: Re: st: MI estimate error

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Michael Beck <michael.beck@edu.unibe.ch>
wrote:
> But when I exchange the dependent variable trying to compute the 
> following
>
> mi estimate, post: mlogit manote staat2 staat3 staat4 staat5, 
> baseoutcome(2) rr vce(cluster XYZ)
>
> (manote being the grade in math)
>
> Stata is telling me:
>
> mi estimate: omitted terms vary
>    The set of omitted variables or categories is not consistent 
> between m=1 and m=5; this is not
>    allowed.  To identify varying sets, you can use mi xeq to run the 
> command on individual
>    imputations or you can reissue the command with mi estimate, 
> noisily
>
>
> I have no idea what the problem is and how to deal with it.

I guess it means the following: -mlogit- needs to exclude one reference
category. If the reference differs across models, than the coefficients
cannot be compared, and averaging them would result in completely
meaningless numbers. In which case, Stata is issuing an error instead. You
see if this is the case by looking at -tab m manote, missing- to see if the
imputation model created any "weird"
grades.

Hope this helps,
Maarten

--------------------------
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