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]

From |
David Hoaglin <dchoaglin@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: opposite sign of one of the independent variables |

Date |
Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:23:56 -0500 |

Hi, Deepti. It may be helpful to look at the "added variable plot" (also known as the "partial regression plot") for the predictor variable whose sign is opposite to what you expected. In that plot, the vertical coordinate is residual from regressing the dependent variable on all the predictor variables except that one, and the horizontal coordinate is the residual from regressing that one predictor variable on all the other predictors. A line fitted through the origin of the plot would have slope equal to the coefficient of the one predictor in the multiple regression. Importantly, the plot would show whether the relationship is nonlinear, and whether some data points are unduly influential. More generally, one often has little intuition for the sign or magnitude of the coefficients in a multiple regression. The interpretation often given for an estimated regression coefficient in a multiple regression is that it is summarizes the change in the dependent variable corresponding to a change of 1 unit in the predictor variable when all the other predictors are held fixed. That interpretation is too simple, and it is often simply incorrect. In general, the appropriate interpretation is that the estimated regression coefficient summarizes the change in the dependent variable corresponding to a change of 1 unit in the predictor variable AFTER ADJUSTING FOR SIMULTANEOUS CHANGE IN THE OTHER PREDICTORS IN THE MODEL (in the data at hand). This is more complicated, but multiple regression is not simple! If the data have not been collected in a way that held the other variables fixed, one cannot make broad statements about holding them fixed, though it is usually satisfactory to make predictions with them fixed in the region covered by the data (i.e., one must be cautious about extrapolating beyond the data). David Hoaglin On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 2:05 AM, Deepti Garg <deeptigarg78@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > Hi list, > > I have been working on the panel data in Stata. There are some variables in the data. When I run the regression, the sign of the coefficient I am getting on one of the variables is the opposite of what I am considering in my research. The sign is as expected if I delete one of the independent variables included in the regression model. However, the correlation coefficient does not show any correlation between the two variables. Could someone please guide me on that? > > Many many thanks in advance! > Deepti * * 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/

**References**:**st: opposite sign of one of the independent variables***From:*Deepti Garg <deeptigarg78@yahoo.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Machine spec for 70GB data, Summary** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: Ado File for MI Estimation Stata 12** - Previous by thread:
**RE: st: RE: opposite sign of one of the independent variables** - Next by thread:
**st: XTOVERID after XTHTAYLOR Warning - endogenous variable(s) collinear with instruments, 3200 conformability error, and other errors** - Index(es):