Bookmark and Share

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

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

Re: st: saving regress results and variable names i.var#i.var

From   Maarten buis <[email protected]>
To   [email protected]
Subject   Re: st: saving regress results and variable names i.var#i.var
Date   Mon, 4 Oct 2010 15:35:51 +0100 (BST)

--- On Mon, 4/10/10, Benhoen2 wrote:
> The more frustrating problem though is how to have the
> factors in the interaction variables identified.  The 
> results seem to discard to factor names. The variable
> blkgrp (FYI "census blockgroup") has ~1,200 unique
> values in the sample (e.g., 89556, 42663, 48335), and the
> variable pv ("photo voltaic") has two values (e.g., 1=yes,
> 0=no) and to be useful the results need to be matched
> with their identifiers.  The output seems to discard these
> names and instead uses a simple integer series (blkgrp pv:
> e.g., 1 1, 1 0, 2 1, 2 0,...1199 1, 1199 0, 1200 1, 1200
> 0).  

This is why you should use post-estimation commands like 
-predict- or -predictnl-. I am sure you could figure out
the logic behind these factor variables, and I am sure 
there is a logic, but the likelihood of making an error 
is just too big. Moreover, the code would be very 
difficult to debug. So I recommend that you try to 
rethink what you want to do in terms of -predict- and/or 
-predictnl- and/or -margins-. You don't say what you want 
to do with those estimates, but with a bit of creative 
thinking you can do about anything with these commands.

Hope this helps,

Maarten L. Buis
Institut fuer Soziologie
Universitaet Tuebingen
Wilhelmstrasse 36
72074 Tuebingen


*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2018 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index