Hi Listers,
I want to make sure I am correctly interpreting my 2*3 interaction following a logistic regression. My predictors are sex (m vs. f) and task type (easy vs. medium vs. high) on completion rates (yes/no).
I find including the interaction term in my model does improve the fit using a likelihood ratio test so I would like to know what is going on. Male and easy are the reference in my anlalysis category as coded as 0. logistic pass i.sex##i..task
To compare females (to males) for each test type, I use the following:
logistic pass i.sex#i..task i.task
which a colleague pointed out is equivalent to:
lincom 1.sex_n+1.sex#0.task
lincom 1.sex_n+1.sex#1.task
lincom 1.sex_n+1.sex#2.task
Is this correct?
I am unsure why, in the lincom statement, only sex and the interaction term are included but not task - any explanation would be much appreciated.
Thanks,
Laura
Related Posts with 2x3 categorical interaction
Divide panel data into subgroupsDear Statalist, I am working on a panel dataset (xtset firm year). I want to divide the firms into…
Regression Discontinuity on Iraq Cholera DataI am currently working with a difference-in-difference model specified as follows: log(Viewsit)= B…
Main effects and/versus InteractionsHi all, I have four vars: outcome coded as 0 "no" 1 "yes" race coded as 1 "asian" 2 "latin" 3 "blac…
Data transformationDear Statatist, I have try reshape and stack command but still can't solve the problem related to …
Problem with instruments in the spivregressDear All, I am estimating a spatial IV model using the files that you can download from here. They …
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 Response to 2x3 categorical interaction
Post a Comment