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: ZOIB procedure


From   Prerna S <maruiprerna@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: ZOIB procedure
Date   Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:09:53 -0400

Maarten,

Below you mention that the Aitchison method provides estimates that
are not easily interpretable. I am assuming then that zoib does not
impose this restriction?  I had previously assumed that the
presentation of zoib results would require presenting marginal effects
exclusively.  But if that is not the case, how would one interpret the
estimated coefficients under zoib?

Thanks.

Prerna

On 19 September 2011 04:11, Maarten Buis <maartenlbuis@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I am guessing, but it seems to me you are worried about correlation of
> error terms across income sources. This is a hard problem, in part
> because proportions are inherently (negatively) correlated. If one
> proportion increases, than the rest will have to decrease. Some work
> has been done by Aitchison (2003), but he sacrifices an interpretable
> effect of explanatory variables on the proportion in order to get the
> correlations right. This is fine if you are mainly interested in those
> correlations, but a problem otherwise.
*
*   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