Bookmark and Share

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]

Re: st: Interpretation of regression outputs when variables are log transformed


From   Junlin Liao <[email protected]>
To   [email protected]
Subject   Re: st: Interpretation of regression outputs when variables are log transformed
Date   Wed, 2 Mar 2011 14:40:59 -0600

Shouldn't they be log(1.1)*0.223 and log(1.1)*1.05 respectively for a
10% increase in independents? The numbers you choose make no
difference. But for 100% increase, the corresponding increase in X
will differ a lot.

On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Marco Buur <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear Stata members,
>
> Me and my colleague are not sure that our interpretations of the
> results are correct. Please confirm!
>
> 10% increase in Y will increase X for 1.1^0.223=1.021481649 which is
> 2.1% and 10 % increase in Z will increase X for 1.1^1.05=1.10525457
> which is 10.5%.
>
> Is this correct?
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>              |               Robust
>    Log(X)    |      Coef.   Std. Err.      z    P>|z|
> -------------+----------------------------------------------
>    Log(Y)    |   .223     .033     3.57   0.000
>    Log(Z)    |   1.05     .1045    11.14  0.000
>
> Thanks
> Marco
> *
> *   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/
>



-- 
Junlin

*
*   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/


© Copyright 1996–2018 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index