Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: st: confa
From
Maarten Buis <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: confa
Date
Thu, 7 Jul 2011 15:24:23 +0200
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Aggie Chidlow wrote:
> Today I have read that "ml" should not be used with categorical data.
> Instead it is recommended that "wls" (i.e. weighted least squares)
> should be used as proposed by Browne(1984b).
Quoting the Statalist FAQ
(<http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/statalist.html#others>):
"Precise literature references please! Please do not assume that the
literature familiar to you is familiar to all members of Statalist. Do
not refer to publications with just minimal details (e.g., author and
date). Questions of the form “Has anyone implemented the
heteroscedasticity under a full moon test of Sue, Grabbit, and Runne
(1989)?” admittedly divide the world. Anyone who has not heard of the
said test would not be helped by the full reference to answer the
question, but they might well appreciate the full reference."
-- 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/