IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/boc/usug15/08.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Logistic regression: Why we often can do what we think we can do

Author

Listed:
  • Maarten Buis

    (Department of History and Sociology, University of Konstanz)

Abstract

There is increasing criticism of the ways in which the raw coefficients and odds ratios from logistic regression have been used. The argument is that logistic regression models a latent propensity of success and that the scale of that latent variable is fixed by fixing the variance of the error term. If one adds a variable to a model, the variance of the residual is likely to decrease, and the scale of the dependent variable thus changes. Comparing models with and without that additional variable thus becomes problematic. Similarly, a comparison of models in groups that are likely to have different residual variances will also be problematic. However, I will argue that logistic regression has an unusual dependent variable: a probability, which measures how certain we are that an event of interest happens. This degree of certainty is a function of how much information we have, which in case of logistic regression is captured by the variables we add to the model. If the dependent variable is interpreted in that way many of the problems with logistic regression turn out to be desirable properties of the logistic regression model.

Suggested Citation

  • Maarten Buis, 2015. "Logistic regression: Why we often can do what we think we can do," United Kingdom Stata Users' Group Meetings 2015 08, Stata Users Group.
  • Handle: RePEc:boc:usug15:08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.org/usug2015/buis_cando_uksug15.pdf
    File Function: presentation slides
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee, Lung-Fei, 1982. "Specification error in multinomial logit models : Analysis of the omitted variable bias," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 197-209, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Tariq Mahmood & Najam us Saqib & Muhammad Ali Qasim, 2017. "Parental Effects on Primary School Enrolment under Different Types of Household Headship: Evidence from Pakistan," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 56(3), pages 249-264.
    2. Jørgen Modalsli, 2023. "Multigenerational Persistence: Evidence from 146 Years of Administrative Data," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 58(3), pages 929-961.
    3. 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.
    4. Kuha, Jouni & Mills, Colin, 2017. "On Group Comparisons with Logistic Regression Models," SocArXiv gwck3, Center for Open Science.
    5. Kuha, Jouni & Mills, Colin, 2018. "On group comparisons with logistic regression models," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 84163, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xia, Xiaoyu, 2016. "Forming wage expectations through learning: Evidence from college major choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 132(PA), pages 176-196.
    2. Joshua Lospinoso & Michael Schweinberger & Tom Snijders & Ruth Ripley, 2011. "Assessing and accounting for time heterogeneity in stochastic actor oriented models," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 5(2), pages 147-176, July.
    3. Aslund, O., 2000. "Immigrant Settlement Policies and Subsequent Migration," Papers 2000-23, Uppsala - Working Paper Series.
    4. Aslund, Olof, 2005. "Now and forever? Initial and subsequent location choices of immigrants," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 141-165, March.
    5. Tomás del Barrio Casto & William Nilsson & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo, 2013. "How wrong can you be, without noticing? Further evidence on speci?cation errors in the Conditional Logit," Working Papers 1318, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
    6. Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2016. "Presenting the Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives property in a first course on logit modeling," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 25-29.
    7. Guevara, C. Angelo, 2018. "Overidentification tests for the exogeneity of instruments in discrete choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 241-253.
    8. Anett Hansen & Harald Selte, 2000. "Air Pollution and Sick-leaves," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 16(1), pages 31-50, May.
    9. Amalesh Sharma & V. Kumar & Sourav Bikash Borah & Anirban Adhikary, 2022. "Complexity in a multinational enterprise’s global supply chain and its international business performance: A bane or a boon?," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(5), pages 850-878, July.
    10. Thi Mai Luong, 2020. "Selection Effects of Lender and Borrower Choices on Risk Measurement, Management and Prudential Regulation," PhD Thesis, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney, number 3-2020, January-A.
    11. Gabriele Restelli, 2023. "Development and International Migration: The Effect of Income on Regular and Irregular Migration Intentions to Europe," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 49(1), pages 135-174, March.
    12. van Cranenburgh, Sander & Prato, Carlo G., 2016. "On the robustness of random regret minimization modelling outcomes towards omitted attributes," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 51-70.
    13. Guevara, C. Angelo, 2015. "Critical assessment of five methods to correct for endogeneity in discrete-choice models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 240-254.
    14. Erik Bergkvist, 2001. "The value of time and forecasting of flowsin freight transportation," ERSA conference papers ersa01p271, European Regional Science Association.
    15. Ramalho, Esmeralda A. & Ramalho, Joaquim J.S., 2010. "Is neglected heterogeneity really an issue in binary and fractional regression models? A simulation exercise for logit, probit and loglog models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 987-1001, April.
    16. Hanemann, W. Michael & Kanninen, Barbara, 1996. "The Statistical Analysis Of Discrete-Response Cv Data," CUDARE Working Papers 25022, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    17. Sifringer, Brian & Lurkin, Virginie & Alahi, Alexandre, 2020. "Enhancing discrete choice models with representation learning," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 236-261.
    18. Bento, Antonio M. & Li, Shanjun & Roth, Kevin, 2012. "Is there an energy paradox in fuel economy? A note on the role of consumer heterogeneity and sorting bias," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 44-48.
    19. Hotle, Susan L. & Castillo, Marco & Garrow, Laurie A. & Higgins, Matthew J., 2015. "The impact of advance purchase deadlines on airline consumers’ search and purchase behaviors," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 1-16.
    20. Patrizia Lattarulo & Valentino Masucci & Maria Grazia Pazienza, 2014. "Is it really impossible to change transport mode behaviours? An experiment for sustainable urban mobility," Rapporti e ricerche 600, Istituto Regionale per la Programmazione Economica della Toscana.

    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:boc:usug15:08. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/stataea.html .

    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.