thanks for your clarification!
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 11:26 AM, Maarten buis <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, that can happen, for instance in the example below the odds of
> being in good repair is ~1900% larger for foreign cars than for
> domestic cars:
>
> sysuse auto, clear
> recode rep78 1/3=0 4/5=1
> logit rep78 foreign , or
> listcoef, percent
>
> In this case the odds ratios compares the likelihood of being in good
> repair of foreign and domestic cars. The likelihood is represented with
> odds: the number of carrs in good repair for every car in bad repair.
> To gain a bit more confidence in this result you might want to know
> what the odds of being in good repair is for domestic cars. This you
> would get if Stata also reported exp(_cons) when you asked for the -or-
> option, unfortunately Stata doesn't do that (I know, I have asked for
> that a number of times). However, you can trick Stata in doing that:
>
> gen one = 1
> logit rep78 one foreign , or nocons
>
> For every domestic car in bad repair there are only ~.30 cars in good
> repair. If we multiply this by the odds ratio we get the odds of being
> in good repair for foreign cars:
>
> di exp(_b[foreign])*exp(_b[one])
>
> For every foreign car in bad repair there are 6 cars in good repair. We
> could get those two odds in one go by adding both a dummie for domestic
> and a dummy for foreign cars (and leave out the constant):
>
> gen domestic = !foreign
> logit rep78 domestic foreign, nocons or
>
> I hope this helps,
> Maarten
>
>
>
>
> --- Jn <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Dear Stata users,
> >
> > I am a student and I have one question regarding interpretation of a
> > logit regression. After running my regression I used -listcoef-
> > command (in percentage form) for interpretation of the coefficients.
> > Some of my dummy independent variables return with extremely high
> > percentage chnage in odds i.e. 2,500% and I am not sure if I am
> > interpreting this right. Does that mean the odds of my dependent
> > variable = 1 increase by 2500% for ___??___ (i don't get this part,
> > when the independent variable is binary). Would it make sense for me
> > to interpret it as, for instsance, a 0.5 increase in probability of x
> > variable increases the odds of y=1 by 1250 %?
> >
> > Any help appreciated..thanks
> > *
> > * For searches and help try:
> > * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
> > * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> > * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
> >
>
>
> -----------------------------------------
> Maarten L. Buis
> Department of Social Research Methodology
> Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
> Boelelaan 1081
> 1081 HV Amsterdam
> The Netherlands
>
> visiting address:
> Buitenveldertselaan 3 (Metropolitan), room Z434
>
> +31 20 5986715
>
> http://home.fsw.vu.nl/m.buis/
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> Rise to the challenge for Sport Relief with Yahoo! For Good
>
> http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/
>
>
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
>
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
