Bookmark and Share

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]

Re: st: Fwd: Another question about zero inflated models


From   Joerg Luedicke <joerg.luedicke@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: Fwd: Another question about zero inflated models
Date   Thu, 24 Feb 2011 13:14:39 -0500

On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 1:07 PM, rachel grant <rachelannegrant@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for replying. No, DEGD is my continuous independent variable
> which I think nay be causing zeros in my dependent count variable ,
> MALES.
> I used DEGD as the inflation variable, and it was highly sig with a
> negative coefficient. What I am hoping this means is that the higher
> the DEGD, the lower probability of zero MALES. That would be
> biologically sensible.
> regards, Rachel
>

Yes, this interpretation is correct. (You could also see that by
running a simple logistic regression with your zeros coded as 1 and
count>0 coded as 0 if you want to confirm your interpretation...)

J.
*
*   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/


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