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 |
Suryadipta Roy <sroy2138@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: Interpretation of interaction term in nonlinear models |

Date |
Thu, 30 May 2013 10:52:45 -0400 |

Dear Maarten and fellow Statalisters, I actually had a related question as to whether there might be a similar (one-sentence) interpretation in case of a three-way interaction between the same categorical variable, the continuous variable with another categorical variable (0/1). Of course, I can and have used -margins - with -marginsplot- to show how the interaction effects differ in the presence of this categorical variable, but I was wondering if I could get some help with an easier interpretation. The coefficient of the three-way interaction term (standardized continuous by categorical by categorical) in the fixed effects Poisson regression with the -irr- option is 0.74 and in the probability metric form is -0.21. Once again, thank you very much for the help! Sincerely, Suryadipta. On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Suryadipta Roy <sroy2138@gmail.com> wrote: > Maarten, > This is very helpful, thank you very much! For some reason, I thought > that the z_phd variable in your example is a categorical variable as > well when I had previously read the thread. I guess that I would need > to standardize my continuous variable for a similar interpretation. > > Sincerely, > Suryadipta. > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Suryadipta Roy <sroy2138@gmail.com> wrote: >> Dear Statalisters, >> >> I am studying the effect of an interaction between a categorical >> variable (0/1) and a continuous variable (0-6) on the dependent >> variable in a nonlinear model (using -xtpoisson-). The value of the >> coefficient using the -irr- option is 0.90, while the size of the >> interaction term in the probability metric form is, of course, -0.11 >> (exp(-0.11) = 0.90). My basic question is, if it might be possible to >> have a one-sentence interpretation of the value of the coefficient in >> the multiplicative form (0.90), e.g. something in the lines of "the >> effect of the categorical variable increases by a factor of 0.9 (i.e. >> a 10% reduction of the dependent variable) due to an 1% increase in >> the continuous variable"? Any suggestion in this regard will be highly >> appreciated. >> >> Sincerely, >> Suryadipta Roy. >> * >> * 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/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: Interpretation of interaction term in nonlinear models***From:*Maarten Buis <maartenlbuis@gmail.com>

**References**:**st: Interpretation of interaction term in nonlinear models***From:*Suryadipta Roy <sroy2138@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Interpretation of interaction term in nonlinear models***From:*Suryadipta Roy <sroy2138@gmail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Function MONTHS** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: questions about gologit2** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: Interpretation of interaction term in nonlinear models** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: Interpretation of interaction term in nonlinear models** - Index(es):