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
Simulating data for logistic regression with categorical variablesDear Statalists, I would like to test the effect of sample size on standard errors of interaction e…
(Easy) Quadratic term of variable in regression: Joint hypothesis testHello, when a variable enters an estimation model in a quadratic term as well, there are two coeffic…
How do do multilevel multinomial regression for multiply imputed data?Hello Everyone, I'm doing a project on how high school racial segregation may impact racial/ethnic …
Generate a new variable based on character ("/") of another variable Code: +-------------------------------------------+ | …
SYS-GMM: Problem of overidentifying restrictionsHello everybody, I want to analyse determinants of corporate leverage in the past twenty years (wit…
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 Response to 2x3 categorical interaction
Post a Comment