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 at the end of May, 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 06:02:38 -0400

>
> I can think of two reasons why the statistical significance differs,
> and they are all a variation on the point that they represent
> different null-hypotheses: 1) The parameters represent relative
> effects (ratios), while marginal effects represent absolute effects
> (differences). 2) The marginal effects combine the effects on all two
> or three equations of the model.
>

Maarten,  here is what I understand of the marginal effects. One can estimate

a) mfx, predict (pr) - this is the marginal effects of the proportion
b) mfx, predict (pr0) - marginal effects of the dependent variable = 0
c) mfx, predict (pr1) - marginal effects of the dependent variable = 1
d) mfx, predict (prcond) - marginal effects of the dependent variable = (0,1)

I am  interested in b) and d) so I want to be clear on whether I have
this right. So are you suggesting that of these 4 options a) is the
best route to take whereas the remaining 3 are difficult to explain?

Thanks.
Prerna
*
*   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