IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/boc/asug06/15.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Group comparisons and other issues in interpreting models for categorical outcomes using Stata

Author

Listed:
  • J. Scott Long

    () (Indiana University)

Abstract

This presentation examines methods for interpreting regression models for categorical outcomes using predicted values. The talk begins with a simple example using basic commands in Stata. It builds on this example to show how more advanced programming features in Stata along with commands in Long and Freese's SPost package can be used in more complex applications that involve plotting predictions. These tools are then applied to the problem of comparing groups in models for categorical outcomes, focusing on the binary regression model. Identification issues make commonly used tests inappropriate since these tests confound the magnitude of the regression coefficients and the variance of the error. An alternative approach is proposed based on the comparisons of the predictions across groups. This approach is illustrated by extending the tools presented in the first part of the talk.

Suggested Citation

  • J. Scott Long, 2006. "Group comparisons and other issues in interpreting models for categorical outcomes using Stata," North American Stata Users' Group Meetings 2006 15, Stata Users Group.
  • Handle: RePEc:boc:asug06:15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.org/nasug2006/sug_long_25jul2006.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://repec.org/nasug2006/scottlong_sug.zip
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jun Xu & J. Scott Long, 2005. "Confidence intervals for predicted outcomes in regression models for categorical outcomes," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 5(4), pages 537-559, December.
    2. Paul D. Allison, 1999. "Comparing Logit and Probit Coefficients Across Groups," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 28(2), pages 186-208, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:boc:asug06:15. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Christopher F Baum). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/stataea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.