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: ordered logistic regression with endogenous variable


From   Joerg Luedicke <joerg.luedicke@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: ordered logistic regression with endogenous variable
Date   Thu, 11 Oct 2012 10:13:04 -0500

Dear Justina,

I would not consider this off-topic as it seems directly related to
the original posting and follow-up posts by you and Anat. And after
all, Statalist is rather a discussion forum than a help line which
includes the possibility of receiving unsolicited advice.

Joerg


On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Justina Fischer <JAVFischer@gmx.de> wrote:
> Dear Joerg,
>
> thanks for providing me with your interesting comments on my research approach.
>
> However, I would (and many others on this list, I presume) appreciate if you could from now on post such off-topic comments to me in private.
>
> Best regards
>
> Justina
> -------- Original-Nachricht --------
>> Datum: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 09:24:35 -0500
>> Von: Joerg Luedicke <joerg.luedicke@gmail.com>
>> An: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
>> Betreff: Re: st: ordered logistic regression with endogenous variable
>
>> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Justina Fischer <JAVFischer@gmx.de>
>> wrote:
>> > Whether or not effect size is meaningful depends on the research
>> question; I am sure your supervisor will agree with me on that statement.
>> > In many of my publications on happiness (LFS), observing an effect or
>> not was the most important question, whereas magnitude played only a minor
>> role for the referees.
>>
>> I find it hard to imagine a situation in the context of applied
>> research with real data where effect sizes would not be important. If
>> the importance of inspecting effect sizes (and related stuff like the
>> form of the effect etc.) would depend on a research question, then
>> perhaps there is something wrong with the research question itself.
>> You can always find 'significant' effects which are meaningless in
>> practice. It is probably also problematic to focus on what reviewers
>> may or may not want to see. Such issues are discussed in this
>> interesting article from Gerd Gigerenzer:
>>
>> http://library.mpib-berlin.mpg.de/ft/gg/GG_Mindless_2004.pdf
>>
>> Joerg
>> *
>> *   For searches and help try:
>> *   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
>> *   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/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/faqs/resources/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/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/


© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index