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]

From |
Felix Wilke <felixw83@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |

Subject |
st: Plot probability function after xtlogit, re - how to interpret constant? |

Date |
Thu, 23 May 2013 13:19:28 +0200 |

Dear Statalist, I have some longitudinal models (xtlogit, re) containing interaction effects. Now I would like to plot the effect of the interaction effects. Therefore I use a function like the following (x2 being a dummy variable): twoway function y0=exp(_b[_cons]+_b[x1]*x)/(1+exp(_b[_cons]+_b[x1]*x)), range(0 4) || function y1=exp(_b[_cons]+_b[x2]+_b[x1]*x+_b[interaction_x1x2]*x)/(1+exp(_b[_cons]+_b[x2]+_b[x1]*x+_b[interaction_x1x2]*x)) The shape of the function display the effects as expected. My problem, however, is the estimated probability. It is unrealistic low - if I repeat the same regression as a cross-section analysis I get proper probabilities. I guess the constant in an xtlogit,re model is to be interpreted differently than in a cross sectional logit model. Is this right? And how do I interpret the estimated probabilities in a xtlogit, re model? Thanks a lot felix * * 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/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: Plot probability function after xtlogit, re - how to interpret constant?***From:*Maarten Buis <maartenlbuis@gmail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**st: ivqreg user-written code** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: RE: Conserving variables and value labels while reshaping wide to long** - Previous by thread:
**st: ivqreg user-written code** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: Plot probability function after xtlogit, re - how to interpret constant?** - Index(es):