Bookmark and Share

Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: st: multinomial multilevel analysis in Stata

From   Rosie Chen <>
To   "" <>
Subject   Re: st: multinomial multilevel analysis in Stata
Date   Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:18:59 -0700 (PDT)

Thank you, Maarten. If I keep the outcome variable as a continuous variable, what would be a better way? 1. to treat it as it is,  2. log of the outcome, since its' distribution is skewed. But what to do with it since there are lot of cases have zero value for the outcome? 3. standardize the outcome. 
Any thoughts would be appreciated. 

----- Original Message -----
From: Maarten Buis <>
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 11:42 AM
Subject: Re: st: multinomial multilevel analysis in Stata

On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Rosie Chen <> wrote:
> (1) For example, suppose the outcome variable measures the percentage of budget purchasing luxurious items within a person's monthly salary, and it is on a continuous scale. I can recode it into a three-category variable, 1 indicating no purchase at all, 2 indicating larger than zero but smaller than 20%, and 3 indicating 20% or more. Should I treat it as an ordinal outcome or multinomial outcome?

You should not recode it at all but model the continuous variable as
is. With recoding you just loose information and loosing information
is bad.

> (3) Do I need to include weighting variable for each level of data, if there are 3 levels in the model? It seems to me to be common to use level 1 weights, but I haven't seen a lot of studies using weights for all levels.

I believe you can do so with -gllamm-.

Hope this helps,

Maarten L. Buis
Institut fuer Soziologie
Universitaet Tuebingen
Wilhelmstrasse 36
72074 Tuebingen

*   For searches and help try:

*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2017 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index