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: Fwd: Comparing marginal effects of two subsamples


From   Jianhong Chen <jianhongchen1985@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: Fwd: Comparing marginal effects of two subsamples
Date   Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:49:08 -0400

Thank you very much. Just to confirm,  there is no need to compare
marginal effect by splitting sample. As long as I provide the
incidence-rate ratio for interaction term and it is sigificant, I can
say that the hypothesized interaction is supported. Right?

Best,

Jianhong
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Maarten Buis <maartenlbuis@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Jianhong Chen wrote:
>> First, I used nbreg, dv iv moderator iv*moderator, the coefficient of
>> interaction terms in results section is 0.81. Then, I used nbreg, dv
>> iv moderator iv* moderator, irr; the IRR of interaction terms in the
>> results section is 1.20. Both is significant (p=0.023).
>
> That will always be true. -irr- does not change the model, it only
> changes how the results are displayed.
>
> -- 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/
>

*
*   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