Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

From |
Maarten buis <maartenbuis@yahoo.co.uk> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: Re: Re: st: update seqlogit |

Date |
Fri, 19 Feb 2010 09:10:51 +0000 (GMT) |

--- On Thu, 18/2/10, angelrlaso@gmail.com wrote: > Now the categories are: 1 moved 2 absent 3 long absence > 4 refusal 5 interviewed. > > In relation with the "multinomial" transition, I definitively > do not want to merge the categories absent (what mainly means > "at work") and long absence (mainly meaning "on vacation"). > But if I follow your second proposal, I don't understand very > well what I'm modelling. > It seems that the transition 3 4: 5 6 (that now should be > 2 3: 4 5) is just merging the two categories and the > transition 3:4 (now 2:3) is the transition between being > absent and being in long absence, which for me it is not a > transition > (you are either absent or in long absence, but both are > deadways in comparison with being at home). I saw this as follows: transition 1, you either got the right adress or not 1 : 2 3 4 5 transition 2, given that you got the right adress, someone is either there or not 2 3 : 4 5 transition 3, given that nobody is not at home, that could be because of short absense or long absense 2 : 3 transition 4, given that somebody is at home, that person can either participate or not 4 : 5 If you don't care about the difference between short absense and long absens ("both are deadways in comparison with being at home") then you can combine them. If you combine them, then you'll need to do so in your variable, you cannot just leave transition three out without changing your dependent variable. > Seqlogit coefficients are congruent with this only for the > sex variable, but not for age nor origin This is not a difference between -seqlogit- and -logit-, actually there can be none, instead the difference is due to the fact that in one you included interaction terms and in the other you did not. Hope this helps, Maarten -------------------------- Maarten L. Buis Institut fuer Soziologie Universitaet Tuebingen Wilhelmstrasse 36 72074 Tuebingen Germany http://www.maartenbuis.nl -------------------------- * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**References**:**Re: Re: Re: st: update seqlogit***From:*angelrlaso@gmail.com

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: RE: AW: help with twoway bar chart using by option** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: aic bic adjusted R-squared with svy command** - Previous by thread:
**Re: Re: Re: st: update seqlogit** - Next by thread:
**st: dealing with duplicate "pairs" of columns** - Index(es):