IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/pscirm/v4y2016i03p621-639_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Compression and Conditional Effects: A Product Term Is Essential When Using Logistic Regression to Test for Interaction

Author

Listed:
  • Rainey, Carlisle

Abstract

Previous research in political methodology argues that researchers do not need to include a product term in a logistic regression model to test for interaction if they suspect interaction due to compression alone. I disagree with this claim and offer analytical arguments and simulation evidence that when researchers incorrectly theorize interaction due to compression, models without a product term bias the researcher, sometimes heavily, toward finding interaction. However, simulation studies also show that models with a product term fit a broad range of non-interactive relationships surprisingly well, enabling analysts to remove most of the bias toward finding interaction by simply including a product term.

Suggested Citation

  • Rainey, Carlisle, 2016. "Compression and Conditional Effects: A Product Term Is Essential When Using Logistic Regression to Test for Interaction," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(3), pages 621-639, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:4:y:2016:i:03:p:621-639_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S204984701500059X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Eelco van der Maat, 2021. "Simplified complexity: Analytical strategies for conflict event research," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(1), pages 87-108, January.
    2. Akihiro Shiroshita & Norio Yamamoto & Natsumi Saka & Motohiro Okumura & Hiroshi Shiba & Yuki Kataoka, 2022. "Inappropriate Evaluation of Effect Modifications Based on Categorical Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-9, November.
    3. Caitlin Ainsley, 2022. "Federal reserve appointments and the politics of senate confirmation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 190(1), pages 93-110, January.
    4. David Altman & Federico Rojas-de-Galarreta & Francisco Urdinez, 2021. "An interactive model of democratic peace," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(3), pages 384-398, May.
    5. Barbara Dluhosch, 2018. "Trade, Inequality, and Subjective Well-Being: Getting at the Roots of the Backlash Against Globalization," LIS Working papers 741, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:4:y:2016:i:03:p:621-639_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ram .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.