Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
From | Maarten buis <maartenbuis@yahoo.co.uk> |
To | statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |
Subject | Re: st: Truncated at zero count data with underdispersion |
Date | Tue, 12 Oct 2010 08:45:11 +0100 (BST) |
--- On Mon, 11/10/10, Laurie Molina wrote: > What do you think about a glm log gamma distribution? > With the log link i ensure that the conditional expectation > is positive, and i know i lose the posibility of predicting > puntual probabilities, but with the log gamma i can have > underdispersion with consistency, isnt it? If you use quasi-likelihood (i.e. the -vce(robust)- option) and you think that the log link function accurately represents your conditional mean, then you already have consistency, regarless of whether you use the variance function from the poisson or gamma or any other variance function. The argument is however asymptotic, and the asymptotics is likely to kick in sooner (i.e. for smaller datasets) when the variance function is more appropriate for your data. To see which variance function is appropriate you can plot Pearson residuals agains the linear predictor and see if the variance of residuals is constant over the linear predictor (just like looking for heteroskedasticity in linear regression). See for example chapter 17 of Hardin & Hilbe (2001). Hope this helps, Maarten James W. Hardin and Joseph M. Hilbe (2001) Generalized Linear Models and Extensions, second edition. College Station, TX: Stata Press. <http://www.stata.com/bookstore/glmext.html> -------------------------- Maarten L. Buis Institut fuer Soziologie Universitaet Tuebingen Wilhelmstrasse 36 72074 Tuebingen Germany http://www.maartenbuis.nl -------------------------- * * 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/