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: confa with R2>1


From   Anders Alexandersson <andersalex@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: confa with R2>1
Date   Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:07:56 -0400

It's a "Heywood case", so maybe you specified the wrong model.
Heywood cases are discussed, for example, on pages 362-363 in the SJ
9(3) article for confa:
http://www.stata-journal.com/article.html?article=st0169

An alternative to the user-written -confa- is the new -sem- command in Stata 12.

Anders Alexandersson
andersalex@gmail.com

Sorado  <Sorada.Tapsuwan@csiro.au> wrote:
> I ran a confa model and found that one of my variables has an R2>1 (see variable called BORED). Did I specify something wrong?
>
> If anyone can help that would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Regards
>
> ****OUTPUT BELOW*******
>
> . confa (neg:  ANG ASH GUILT FEAR) (pos:  JOYFUL EXCITED HOPE) (amb:  IRRITATED BORED) (dep:  POWERL CONF DESPAIR), from(ones)
>
[...]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>             |      Coef.   Std. Err.      z    P>|z|     [95% Conf. Interval]
> -------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
[...]
> Var[error]   |
>       BORED |  -.7293374   .1959337    -3.72   0.000     -1.11336   -.3453144
[...]
> -------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
> R2           |
[...]
>       BORED |     1.5988
[...]

*
*   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