<>
" Note that the order of the specification of random effects in -xtmelogit-
is "opposite" of that in -gllamm-. "
As [XT] makes clear at the top of page 249.
HTH
Martin
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cohen, Elan
Sent: Montag, 15. Februar 2010 20:34
To: '[email protected]'
Subject: RE: st: xtmelogit - a very strange treatment of different levels
Note that the order of the specification of random effects in -xtmelogit- is
"opposite" of that in -gllamm-. I believe, in this case, you want:
xi: xtmelogit depvar indepvars || householdID: || personID:
This would also explain why you're getting the same number of units on both
levels.
HTH,
- Elan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> Dimitrije Tišma
> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 16:20
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: st: xtmelogit - a very strange treatment of
> different levels
>
> The command was a quite typical -xtmelogit-. Persons are nested within
> households, i.e. they do not change the HH number over time. As the
> first step I wanted only random intercepts for person and household
> level, so I wrote the following:
>
> xi: xtmelogit depvar indepvars || personID: || householdID:
>
> I did not save the results, I am afraid, but I remember well what was
> puzzling. The group statistics was strange to me, as it showed the
> same number of units on both levels. Obviously, it considered the
> number of person-household combinations as number of households and I
> don't know why. Furthermore, while when using -gllamm- the results
> change considerably by introducing another level (household), here
> they were practically identical to those when using logit. Thanks in
> advance for the answer.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2010/2/12 Airey, David C <[email protected]>:
> > .
> >
> > Show your commands and results.
> >
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >> I am working with some household panel dataset and in
> order to check
> >> for random effects I did both gllamm and xtmelogit
> regression. While
> >> in gllamm everything worked fine, xtmelogit did not deal
> with the two
> >> levels (individuals and households) the way I expected. Namely, it
> >> reports the same number of units on both levels (!) and
> practically no
> >> random effects either level. Also, the results are practically
> >> identical to the results when "normal" logit regression is
> used. Does
> >> anyone know what this could be about? Thanks a lot.
> >>
> >> Dimitrije
> >
> > *
> > * For searches and help try:
> > * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
> > * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> > * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
> >
>
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
>
>
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
