Re: Propensity Score Matching Macro - Forced Matches

Posted by Maguin, Eugene on Aug 09, 2012; 2:24pm
URL: http://spssx-discussion.165.s1.nabble.com/Propensity-Score-Matching-Macro-Forced-Matches-tp5714641p5714646.html

To improve my understanding of your question, should I assume that the logistic regression for participation prediction includes gender?

I have never used the Levesque/Painter syntax but ...

If you say that gender is not included, doesn't that reduce to two separate propensity match operations, one for males, one for females?

If you say that gender is included, doesn't that cause less than optimal matches?

Gene Maguin



-----Original Message-----
From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of ach7210
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 9:57 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Propensity Score Matching Macro - Forced Matches

Yes, sorry, the syntax is here:
http://www.unc.edu/~painter/SPSSsyntax/propen.txt



--
View this message in context: http://spssx-discussion.1045642.n5.nabble.com/Propensity-Score-Matching-Macro-Forced-Matches-tp5714641p5714643.html
Sent from the SPSSX Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to [hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the command. To leave the list, send the command SIGNOFF SPSSX-L For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command INFO REFCARD

=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD