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 for negative and positive slope combination of interaction term
From
David Crow <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: interpretation for negative and positive slope combination of interaction term
Date
Thu, 9 May 2013 17:34:34 -0500
Yes, Nahla and David Hoaglin were absolutely right. Many apologies.
David
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 5:06 PM, David Hoaglin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear Nahla,
>
> You are correct about the slope and intercept, as shown in Figure 7.8
> of that book. In David Crow's simplified model, B2 does not
> contribute to the slope for MV.
>
> A major part of your difficulty comes from trying to make ratio
> interpretations of coefficients in a model whose coefficients can tell
> you about differences. One usual way to get coefficients that have a
> straightforward interpretation as ratios is to analyze the dependent
> variable in a logarithmic scale. If it is not appropriate to work
> with your dependent variable in a log scale, you may be able to use a
> generalized linear model with a log link function.
>
> David Hoaglin
>
> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Nahla Betelmal <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Thanks for the reply David, but I think there is something not quite
>> right. If you check this file, p.133 figure 7.8
>>
>> http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/21120_Chapter_7.pdf
>>
>> You will notice that in order to get the slope for the group with
>> Dummy= 1 (overconfident manager in my case), we should add the
>> coefficient of beta and gama ( MV and OC*MV in my case) , and to get
>> the intercept for those managers we should add the alpha and y ( my
>> model intercept and the coefficient of OC )
>>
>> I found the same in other files, the problem is that all the examples
>> they provide both beta and gama are positive which makes the addition
>> and interpretation process easy.
>>
>> my question is how to add and interpret when one is positive and the
>> other is negative . As the effect of MV on realistic managers is -
>> 0.0566 and on overconfident managers is + 0.0596 , it moves from
>> negative to positive 0.003 (again the interaction is significant
>> although at 10 level). how many times MV effect overconfident managers
>> more than other managers ?
>>
>> I would really appreciate help in that
>>
>> Many thanks
>>
>> Nahla
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
> * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
--
Web site for México, las Américas y el Mundo:
http://mexicoyelmundo.cide.edu/
====================================
David Crow
Profesor-Investigador/Assistant Professor
División de Estudios Internacionales
Carretera México-Toluca 3655
Col. Lomas de Santa Fe 01210 México, D.F.
Tel.: 5727-9800, ext. 2152
Fax: 5727-9872
====================================
Conmutador: 5727-98-00 Lada sin costo: 01 800 021 2433 (CIDE) |©
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/