IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2107.04946.html

Inference for the proportional odds cumulative logit model with monotonicity constraints for ordinal predictors and ordinal response

Author

Listed:
  • Javier Espinosa-Brito
  • Christian Hennig

Abstract

The proportional odds cumulative logit model (POCLM) is a standard regression model for an ordinal response. Ordinality of predictors can be incorporated by monotonicity constraints for the corresponding parameters. It is shown that estimators defined by optimization, such as maximum likelihood estimators, for an unconstrained model and for parameters in the interior set of the parameter space of a constrained model are asymptotically equivalent. This is used in order to derive asymptotic confidence regions and tests for the constrained model, involving simple modifications for finite samples. The finite sample coverage probability of the confidence regions is investigated by simulation. Tests concern the effect of individual variables, monotonicity, and a specified monotonicity direction. The methodology is applied on real data related to the assessment of school performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Javier Espinosa-Brito & Christian Hennig, 2021. "Inference for the proportional odds cumulative logit model with monotonicity constraints for ordinal predictors and ordinal response," Papers 2107.04946, arXiv.org, revised May 2025.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2107.04946
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2107.04946
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Diaa Al Mohamad & Erik W Van Zwet & Eric Cator & Jelle J Goeman, 2020. "Adaptive critical value for constrained likelihood ratio testing," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 107(3), pages 677-688.
    2. Cohen, Arthur & Kemperman, J. H. B. & Sackrowitz, Harold B., 2000. "Properties of Likelihood Inference for Order Restricted Models," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 50-77, January.
    3. Christopher J. Bennett, 2013. "Inference For Dominance Relations," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1309-1328, November.
    4. Gourieroux, Christian & Holly, Alberto & Monfort, Alain, 1982. "Likelihood Ratio Test, Wald Test, and Kuhn-Tucker Test in Linear Models with Inequality Constraints on the Regression Parameters," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 63-80, January.
    5. de Leeuw, Jan & Mair, Patrick, 2009. "Gifi Methods for Optimal Scaling in R: The Package homals," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 31(i04).
    6. Arne Henningsen & Ott Toomet, 2011. "maxLik: A package for maximum likelihood estimation in R," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 443-458, September.
    7. David J. Olive, 2018. "Applications of hyperellipsoidal prediction regions," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 59(3), pages 913-931, September.
    8. Yuichi Kitamura & Gautam Tripathi & Hyungtaik Ahn, 2004. "Empirical Likelihood-Based Inference in Conditional Moment Restriction Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(6), pages 1667-1714, November.
    9. Christopher J. Bennett, 2013. "Inference For Dominance Relations," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 54, pages 1309-1328, November.
    10. Victor Chernozhukov & Whitney K. Newey & Andres Santos, 2023. "Constrained Conditional Moment Restriction Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(2), pages 709-736, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matthew Robson & Tim Doran & Owen O’Donnell & Tom Van Ourti, 2025. "Do social preferences explain health inequality aversion?," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 23(3), pages 933-956, September.
    2. Angel G. Angelov & Magnus Ekström, 2023. "Tests of stochastic dominance with repeated measurements data," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 107(3), pages 443-467, September.
    3. Chen, Xiaohong & Pouzo, Demian & Powell, James L., 2019. "Penalized sieve GEL for weighted average derivatives of nonparametric quantile IV regressions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 30-53.
    4. Mariusz Górajski & Zbigniew Kuchta, 2022. "Which hallmarks of optimal monetary policy rules matter in Poland? A stochastic dominance approach," Bank i Kredyt, Narodowy Bank Polski, vol. 53(2), pages 149-182.
    5. Hyungsik Roger Moon & Frank Schorfheide, 2006. "Boosting Your Instruments: Estimation with Overidentifying Inequality Moment Conditions," IEPR Working Papers 06.56, Institute of Economic Policy Research (IEPR).
    6. Moon, Hyungsik Roger & Schorfheide, Frank, 2009. "Estimation with overidentifying inequality moment conditions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 153(2), pages 136-154, December.
    7. Hansen, Lars Peter, 2013. "Uncertainty Outside and Inside Economic Models," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2013-7, Nobel Prize Committee.
    8. Yuichi Kitamura & Jörg Stoye, 2013. "Nonparametric analysis of random utility models: testing," CeMMAP working papers 36/13, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    9. Martin Carree & Boris Lokshin & René Belderbos, 2011. "A note on testing for complementarity and substitutability in the case of multiple practices," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 263-269, June.
    10. Govinda Prasad Dhungana & Arun Kumar Chaudhary & Ramesh Prasad Tharu & Vijay Kumar, 2025. "Generalized Alpha Power Inverted Weibull Distribution: Application of Air Pollution in Kathmandu, Nepal," Annals of Data Science, Springer, vol. 12(5), pages 1691-1715, October.
    11. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    12. Zand, Fardad & Van Beers, Cees & Van Leeuwen, George, 2011. "Information technology, organizational change and firm productivity: A panel study of complementarity effects and clustering patterns in Manufacturing and Services," MPRA Paper 46469, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2002. "Inverse probability weighted M-estimators for sample selection, attrition, and stratification," Portuguese Economic Journal, Springer;Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestao, vol. 1(2), pages 117-139, August.
    14. Maness, Michael & Cirillo, Cinzia, 2016. "An indirect latent informational conformity social influence choice model: Formulation and case study," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 93(PA), pages 75-101.
    15. David Lander & David Gunawan & William Griffiths & Duangkamon Chotikapanich, 2020. "Bayesian assessment of Lorenz and stochastic dominance," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(2), pages 767-799, May.
    16. Mazen Nassar & Refah Alotaibi & Ahmed Elshahhat, 2023. "Reliability Estimation of XLindley Constant-Stress Partially Accelerated Life Tests using Progressively Censored Samples," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, March.
    17. Wu Wang & Zhongyi Zhu, 2017. "Conditional empirical likelihood for quantile regression models," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 80(1), pages 1-16, January.
    18. Yue Liu & Ethan X. Fang & Junwei Lu, 2023. "Lagrangian Inference for Ranking Problems," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 71(1), pages 202-223, January.
    19. Jiang, Feiyu & Li, Dong & Zhu, Ke, 2020. "Non-standard inference for augmented double autoregressive models with null volatility coefficients," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 215(1), pages 165-183.
    20. Roy Allen & John Rehbeck, 2020. "Identification of Random Coefficient Latent Utility Models," Papers 2003.00276, arXiv.org.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2107.04946. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.