跨模型比较预测和边际效应的一般框架

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY Sociological Methodology Pub Date : 2019-06-20 DOI:10.1177/0081175019852763
Trenton D. Mize, Long Doan, J. S. Long
{"title":"跨模型比较预测和边际效应的一般框架","authors":"Trenton D. Mize, Long Doan, J. S. Long","doi":"10.1177/0081175019852763","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many research questions involve comparing predictions or effects across multiple models. For example, it may be of interest whether an independent variable’s effect changes after adding variables to a model. Or, it could be important to compare a variable’s effect on different outcomes or across different types of models. When doing this, marginal effects are a useful method for quantifying effects because they are in the natural metric of the dependent variable and they avoid identification problems when comparing regression coefficients across logit and probit models. Despite advances that make it possible to compute marginal effects for almost any model, there is no general method for comparing these effects across models. In this article, the authors provide a general framework for comparing predictions and marginal effects across models using seemingly unrelated estimation to combine estimates from multiple models, which allows tests of the equality of predictions and effects across models. The authors illustrate their method to compare nested models, to compare effects on different dependent or independent variables, to compare results from different samples or groups within one sample, and to assess results from different types of models.","PeriodicalId":48140,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Methodology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0081175019852763","citationCount":"148","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A General Framework for Comparing Predictions and Marginal Effects across Models\",\"authors\":\"Trenton D. Mize, Long Doan, J. S. Long\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0081175019852763\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Many research questions involve comparing predictions or effects across multiple models. For example, it may be of interest whether an independent variable’s effect changes after adding variables to a model. Or, it could be important to compare a variable’s effect on different outcomes or across different types of models. When doing this, marginal effects are a useful method for quantifying effects because they are in the natural metric of the dependent variable and they avoid identification problems when comparing regression coefficients across logit and probit models. Despite advances that make it possible to compute marginal effects for almost any model, there is no general method for comparing these effects across models. In this article, the authors provide a general framework for comparing predictions and marginal effects across models using seemingly unrelated estimation to combine estimates from multiple models, which allows tests of the equality of predictions and effects across models. The authors illustrate their method to compare nested models, to compare effects on different dependent or independent variables, to compare results from different samples or groups within one sample, and to assess results from different types of models.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48140,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociological Methodology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0081175019852763\",\"citationCount\":\"148\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociological Methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0081175019852763\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0081175019852763","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 148

摘要

许多研究问题涉及比较多个模型的预测或效果。例如,在向模型中添加变量后,自变量的效果是否会发生变化,这可能是令人感兴趣的。或者,比较变量对不同结果或不同类型模型的影响可能很重要。这样做时,边际效应是量化效应的有用方法,因为它们是因变量的自然度量,并且在比较logit和probit模型之间的回归系数时避免了识别问题。尽管有了一些进步,可以计算几乎任何模型的边际效应,但目前还没有一种通用的方法来比较不同模型的边际效应。在本文中,作者提供了一个通用框架,用于比较模型之间的预测和边际效应,使用看似不相关的估计来组合来自多个模型的估计,这允许测试模型之间的预测和效果的相等性。作者说明了他们的方法来比较嵌套模型,比较对不同因变量或自变量的影响,比较来自一个样本内不同样本或组的结果,以及评估来自不同类型模型的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A General Framework for Comparing Predictions and Marginal Effects across Models
Many research questions involve comparing predictions or effects across multiple models. For example, it may be of interest whether an independent variable’s effect changes after adding variables to a model. Or, it could be important to compare a variable’s effect on different outcomes or across different types of models. When doing this, marginal effects are a useful method for quantifying effects because they are in the natural metric of the dependent variable and they avoid identification problems when comparing regression coefficients across logit and probit models. Despite advances that make it possible to compute marginal effects for almost any model, there is no general method for comparing these effects across models. In this article, the authors provide a general framework for comparing predictions and marginal effects across models using seemingly unrelated estimation to combine estimates from multiple models, which allows tests of the equality of predictions and effects across models. The authors illustrate their method to compare nested models, to compare effects on different dependent or independent variables, to compare results from different samples or groups within one sample, and to assess results from different types of models.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: Sociological Methodology is a compendium of new and sometimes controversial advances in social science methodology. Contributions come from diverse areas and have something useful -- and often surprising -- to say about a wide range of topics ranging from legal and ethical issues surrounding data collection to the methodology of theory construction. In short, Sociological Methodology holds something of value -- and an interesting mix of lively controversy, too -- for nearly everyone who participates in the enterprise of sociological research.
期刊最新文献
Contextual Embeddings in Sociological Research: Expanding the Analysis of Sentiment and Social Dynamics Using Relative Distribution Methods to Study Economic Polarization across Categories and Contexts Can Human Reading Validate a Topic Model? Question-Order Effect in the Study of Satisfaction with Democracy: Lessons from Three Split-Ballot Experiments Comparing the Robustness of Simple Network Scale-Up Method Estimators
×
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