Stata The Stata listserver
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

st: RE: clogit: two questions

From   Leonelo Bautista <[email protected]>
To   [email protected]
Subject   st: RE: clogit: two questions
Date   Tue, 18 Jan 2005 10:01:21 -0600

-clogit- is used for matched data. I guess your ID variable identifies the
matching pair and that you are using this variable in the -group- option 
-group(id))-. I think you should have only one variable for transportation
cost. So, for the first subject of the pair cost==120 and for the second
subject cost==20. In the way you have your data now, the outcome variable
(mode) is completely identifiable by the independent variables (all choice=1
have public cost=0 and all choice=0 have private cost=0). I don't think you
can get meaningful results in this way.

Leonelo Bautista

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Julia Gamas
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 9:25 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: st: clogit: two questions

Dear all,
I have two questions about clogit: one, about whether or not I "fed" the
correctly to Stata, the second, about the sign on my coefficients.  I do
appologize if there is a simple answer that I overlooked.

1.  I've "fed" data that is alternative specific to find the choice=1 of
private transportation versus choice=0 of using public transit.  I have
sociodemographic variables and generic variables too, but my concern is with
the alternative specific variable of mode cost.  The format I used was the
following for all ID's, can anybody tell me if this is wrong and if so, how
fix it (I couldn't find more information in the Stata manual that might

Id  Mode  Choice    Car-Cost     Public-transit-Cost
32  1        1       120          0
32  2        0         0         20

Did I do the right thing by putting in the cost of using a car when the mode
a car and zero in car cost when the mode is public?

2.  I obtain a POSITIVE coefficient from public transit cost.  My
is that the more public tranist costs, the less we are likely to want to use
and we may substitute to a car.  I interpret this assuming that the model is
estimating V1-V2 (utility of driving - utility of using public transit) as
the logit equations.  This would imply that the coefficient for public
cost is negative in the utility of using public transit, but changes sign to
positive when we subtract that utility from utility of driving.  I wanted to
check with you if this interpretation is correct, or do I, in fact, have the
wrong sign?

Any help you can give me would be immensely appreciated.


Julia A. Gamas
Mexico City Project, EAPS
77 Massachusetts Avenue 54-1823
Cambridge, MA 02139
*   For searches and help try:

*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2024 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index