Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
st: Re: ## Interaction syntax
From
Robin Jeffries <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
st: Re: ## Interaction syntax
Date
Thu, 13 Jan 2011 21:55:41 -0800
It was indeed a simple missing data problem. Thank you for the responses.
-Robin
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Robin Jeffries <[email protected]> wrote:
> I was under the impression that for a categorical variable 'wave' with
> 3 levels (0, 1, 2)
> and another binary indicator variable 'group' (0,1) then the following
> statements are the same:
>
>
> 1) xtlogit i.wave##i.group (other covar)
>
> 2) xtlogit wave1 wave2 group wg1 wg2 (other covar)
>
> where wave1, wave2, wg1, wg2 are the manually created indicators and
> interactions for wave and wave*group respsectivly
>
>
> For most outcomes I am using this with, they produce the exact same
> results. However there have been some instances where using the second
> method results in a model that won't converge, but the first will.
>
> Is there an explanation for this?
>
> Thanks,
> Robin Jeffries
>
*
* 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/