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 |
Maarten Buis <maartenlbuis@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: Binary Choice Model and fixed effects - interpreting the interaction effects? |

Date |
Mon, 2 Apr 2012 15:17:32 +0200 |

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Benjamin Niug wrote: > @Maarten. Thanks. I tried to calculated the marginal effects as > indicated in the paper you mentioned (M.L. Buis (2010) "Stata tip 87: > Interpretation of interactions in non-linear models", The Stata > Journal, 10(2), pp. 305-308) > > However, some interactions are not estimated / "estimable" by Stata > using the -margins- command. The point of that article is that you should _not_ estimate marginal effects. In that article I tried to be nice towards Edward Norton and colleagues and tried to find some situation where marginal effects might make some sense. I did find such a special situation in the case of a fully saturated model(*), but in practice you should just forget about that and go for odds ratios. In retrospect that inclusion of marginal effects in the article was a mistake as this confuses more than it helps. So the bottom line is: There is only one solution and that is to interpret the results in terms of odds ratios. Hope this helps, Maarten (*) A fixed effects model with covariates cannot be a fully saturated model, so this is not an "escape route" open to you. You really really really have no other option than to learn how to use and report odds, odds ratios and ratios of odds ratios. -------------------------- 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/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: Binary Choice Model and fixed effects - interpreting the interaction effects?***From:*Benjamin Niug <benjamin.niug@googlemail.com>

**References**:**st: Binary Choice Model and fixed effects - interpreting the interaction effects?***From:*Benjamin Niug <benjamin.niug@googlemail.com>

**Re: st: Binary Choice Model and fixed effects - interpreting the interaction effects?***From:*Maarten Buis <maartenlbuis@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Binary Choice Model and fixed effects - interpreting the interaction effects?***From:*Benjamin Niug <benjamin.niug@googlemail.com>

**Re: st: Binary Choice Model and fixed effects - interpreting the interaction effects?***From:*Maarten Buis <maartenlbuis@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Binary Choice Model and fixed effects - interpreting the interaction effects?***From:*Benjamin Niug <benjamin.niug@googlemail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Binary Choice Model and fixed effects - interpreting the interaction effects?** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: Binary Choice Model and fixed effects - interpreting the interaction effects?** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: Binary Choice Model and fixed effects - interpreting the interaction effects?** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: Binary Choice Model and fixed effects - interpreting the interaction effects?** - Index(es):