Getting Time Right: Using Cox Models and Probabilities to Interpret Binary Panel Data

IF 4.7 2区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Political Analysis Pub Date : 2021-06-14 DOI:10.1017/pan.2021.14
Shawna K. Metzger, Benjamin T. Jones
{"title":"Getting Time Right: Using Cox Models and Probabilities to Interpret Binary Panel Data","authors":"Shawna K. Metzger, Benjamin T. Jones","doi":"10.1017/pan.2021.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Logit and probit (L/P) models are a mainstay of binary time-series cross-sectional (BTSCS) analyses. Researchers include cubic splines or time polynomials to acknowledge the temporal element inherent in these data. However, L/P models cannot easily accommodate three other aspects of the data’s temporality: whether covariate effects are conditional on time, whether the process of interest is causally complex, and whether our functional form assumption regarding time’s effect is correct. Failing to account for any of these issues amounts to misspecification bias, threatening our inferences’ validity. We argue scholars should consider using Cox duration models when analyzing BTSCS data, as they create fewer opportunities for such misspecification bias, while also having the ability to assess the same hypotheses as L/P. We use Monte Carlo simulations to bring new evidence to light showing Cox models perform just as well—and sometimes better—than logit models in a basic BTSCS setting, and perform considerably better in more complex BTSCS situations. In addition, we highlight a new interpretation technique for Cox models—transition probabilities—to make Cox model results more readily interpretable. We use an application from interstate conflict to demonstrate our points.","PeriodicalId":48270,"journal":{"name":"Political Analysis","volume":"30 1","pages":"151 - 166"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2021.14","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Abstract Logit and probit (L/P) models are a mainstay of binary time-series cross-sectional (BTSCS) analyses. Researchers include cubic splines or time polynomials to acknowledge the temporal element inherent in these data. However, L/P models cannot easily accommodate three other aspects of the data’s temporality: whether covariate effects are conditional on time, whether the process of interest is causally complex, and whether our functional form assumption regarding time’s effect is correct. Failing to account for any of these issues amounts to misspecification bias, threatening our inferences’ validity. We argue scholars should consider using Cox duration models when analyzing BTSCS data, as they create fewer opportunities for such misspecification bias, while also having the ability to assess the same hypotheses as L/P. We use Monte Carlo simulations to bring new evidence to light showing Cox models perform just as well—and sometimes better—than logit models in a basic BTSCS setting, and perform considerably better in more complex BTSCS situations. In addition, we highlight a new interpretation technique for Cox models—transition probabilities—to make Cox model results more readily interpretable. We use an application from interstate conflict to demonstrate our points.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
把握时机:使用Cox模型和概率解释二进制面板数据
摘要Logit和probit(L/P)模型是二元时间序列截面(BTSCS)分析的支柱。研究人员包括三次样条曲线或时间多项式,以确认这些数据中固有的时间元素。然而,L/P模型无法轻易适应数据时间性的其他三个方面:协变效应是否以时间为条件,感兴趣的过程是否因果复杂,以及我们关于时间效应的函数形式假设是否正确。没有考虑到这些问题中的任何一个都相当于错误的指定偏见,威胁到我们推断的有效性。我们认为,学者们在分析BTSCS数据时应该考虑使用Cox持续时间模型,因为它们为这种错误指定偏差创造了更少的机会,同时也有能力评估与L/P相同的假设。我们使用蒙特卡罗模拟来揭示新的证据,表明Cox模型在基本BTSCS设置中的表现与logit模型一样好,有时甚至更好,并且在更复杂的BTSCS情况下表现得更好。此外,我们强调了Cox模型的一种新的解释技术——转换概率——以使Cox模型结果更容易解释。我们使用来自州际冲突的应用程序来证明我们的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Political Analysis
Political Analysis POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
3.70%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: Political Analysis chronicles these exciting developments by publishing the most sophisticated scholarship in the field. It is the place to learn new methods, to find some of the best empirical scholarship, and to publish your best research.
期刊最新文献
Assessing Performance of Martins's and Sampson's Formulae for Calculation of LDL-C in Indian Population: A Single Center Retrospective Study. On Finetuning Large Language Models Explaining Recruitment to Extremism: A Bayesian Hierarchical Case–Control Approach Implementation Matters: Evaluating the Proportional Hazard Test’s Performance Face Detection, Tracking, and Classification from Large-Scale News Archives for Analysis of Key Political Figures
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1