Posted by
Maguin, Eugene on
Dec 15, 2016; 7:46pm
URL: http://spssx-discussion.165.s1.nabble.com/Interactions-binary-logistic-regression-tp5733602p5733618.html
This makes sense to me. However, based on Phd Student's note, it seems that although experiments are/may be designed with multiple risk levels (20, 40, 60, 80, in this case), customary practice is to collapse design levels into "low" and "high" for analysis and reporting. Gene Maguin
-----Original Message-----
From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:
[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Art Kendall
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2016 2:12 PM
To:
[hidden email]
Subject: Re: Interactions binary logistic regression
*IF*
the level of risk were not coarsened you might have additional info.
Am I correct that you only coarsened the risk level to have "repeats"?
If risk were not coarsened the most complex interaction would not be estimable but all lower order interactions would be.
What do other list members think of trying an analysis without coarsening the risk variable?
-----
Art Kendall
Social Research Consultants
--
View this message in context:
http://spssx-discussion.1045642.n5.nabble.com/Interactions-binary-logistic-regression-tp5733602p5733617.htmlSent 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