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: question about the interaction term


From   Maarten Buis <maartenlbuis@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: question about the interaction term
Date   Thu, 25 Apr 2013 17:34:08 +0200

On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 5:27 PM, ZHVictor wrote:
> You mentioned "but make sure that noone interprets the result that one effect is significant and the other is insifinicant as "the effect of A in group B=1 is different from the effect of A in group B=0"."
> So how should I interpret? Because the interaction term is insignificant, I should say A has the same effect in B=0 vs B=1?

Close, but not quite; you should say that you cannot reject the
hypothesis that the effects are the same. Remember, with statistical
tests you can never confirm a hypothesis, you can only reject or fail
to reject. The latter is not the same as accepting. In essence failing
to reject means that there is "absence of evidence"  and this is not
the same as "evidence of absence".

-- Maarten

---------------------------------
Maarten L. Buis
WZB
Reichpietschufer 50
10785 Berlin
Germany

http://www.maartenbuis.nl
---------------------------------
*
*   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