Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Multinomial Logit

    Hello Statalist,

    I am running a multinomial logistic regression using the mlogit command. I have a sample size of 500.

    I regressed the four categories/segments (A, B, C, D) on several independent variables including the intercept, setting A as the reference category, thus using the normal procedure. I understand that I have to interpret the estimated results for each segment B, C, and D in relation to the reference segment A. However, the respective interpretation is somehow hard, not intuitive, and partly confusing. It also makes it more difficult to understand the specifics of a group relative to the whole sample. However, that is what I would like to discuss.

    Here I got an idea about analyzing the multinomial logit model differently and would like to know your opinions: I keep my four segments and add a fifths segment. This 5th segment (segment E) is the sum of all four segments. Thus, I duplicate the entire sample. I run a multinominal regression analysis on the (new) sample (N=1000 including the original A, B, C, and D categories as well as the extra category E) setting the category E as the reference group. In this case, I can interpret the obtained results for each of the segments A, B, C, D relative to the whole sample (category E). While this is very convenient from an interpretation point of view I wonder whether there is anything wrong with that procedure from a methodological/econometrics point of view.

    Let me stress again. Each observation in my model would occur twice, once in either group A, B, C or D and once in E. E is the aggregate of A, B, C and D. In the multinomial logistic regression I would use this aggregate as the reference category.

    Your feedback would be highly appreciated.

  • #2
    Welcome to the Stata Forum / Statalist.

    Please read the FAQ, particularly the advice to use real name. You may edit it by clicking on the "contact us" button and informing name and family name.

    That said, your "different" analysis of the mlogit model seems to violate assumptions related to the categories of Yvar. Furthermore, I wonder whether there is background theory to support it. My guess is no.
    Best regards,

    Marcos

    Comment

    Working...
    X