Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
From | "Reddy, Colin" <creddy@uj.ac.za> |
To | "statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu" <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |
Subject | RE: st: fixed effects with multicollinearity |
Date | Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:07:56 +0000 |
Thanks Daniel So I guess the best is to drop one of the collinear variables.? Colin ________________________________________ From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] on behalf of daniel klein [klein.daniel.81@googlemail.com] Sent: 29 July 2011 11:01 AM To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Subject: Re: st: fixed effects with multicollinearity Colin, please note that mean centring does nothing to solve the underlying problem of collinarity (if there is something like that)., see e.g. Echambadi and Hess (2007) or Shieh, G. (2011). However, in another post (http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2011-04/msg01204.html) Maarten Buis pointed out that in the special case, where a variable is interacted with itself, to model non-linearities, centering can help. Echambadi and Hess (2007). Mean-Centering Does Not Alleviate Collinearity Problems in Moderated Multiple Regression Models. Marketing Science, 26: 438-445 Shieh, G. (2011). Clarifying the role of mean centring in multicollinearity of interaction effects. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 64: 1-12 Best Daniel * * 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/ ________________________________ This email and all contents are subject to the following disclaimer: http://disclaimer.uj.ac.za * * 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/