Multinomial Logistic Regression - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

Multinomial Logistic Regression

Description:

Multinomial Logistic Regression Inanimate objects can be classified scientifically into three major categories; those that don't work, those that break down and ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:955
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 47
Provided by: JohnO150
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Multinomial Logistic Regression


1
Multinomial Logistic Regression Inanimate
objects can be classified scientifically into
three major categories those that don't work,
those that break down and those that get lost
(Russell Baker)
2
Multinomial Logistic Regression
  • Also known as polytomous or nominal logistic
    or logit regression or the discrete choice
    model
  • Generalization of binary logistic regression to a
    polytomous DV
  • When applied to a dichotomous DV identical to
    binary logistic regression

3
Polytomous Variables
  • Three or more unordered categories
  • Categories mutually exclusive and exhaustive
  • Sometimes called multicategorical or sometimes
    multinomial variables

4
Polytomous DVs
  • Reason for leaving welfare
  • marriage, stable employment, move to another
    state, incarceration, or death
  • Status of foster home application
  • licensed to foster, discontinued application
    process prior to licensure, or rejected for
    licensure
  • Changes in living arrangements of the elderly
  • newly co-residing with their children, no longer
    co-residing, or residing in institutions

5
Single (Dichotomous) IV Example
  • DV interview tracking effort
  • easy-to-interview and track mothers (Easy)
  • difficult-to-track mothers who required more
    telephone calls (MoreCalls)
  • difficult-to-track mothers who required more
    unscheduled home visits (MoreVisits)
  • IV race, 0 European-American, 1
    African-American
  • N 246 mothers
  • What is the relationship between race and
    interview tracking effort?

6
Crosstabulation
  • Table 3.1
  • Relationship between race and tracking effort is
    statistically significant ?2(2, N 246) 8.69,
    p .013

7
Reference Category
  • In binary logistic regression category of the DV
    coded 0 implicitly serves as the reference
    category
  • Known as baseline, base, or comparison
    category
  • Necessary to explicitly select reference category
  • Easy selected

8
Probabilities
  • Table 3.1
  • More Calls (vs. Easy)
  • European-American .24 30 / (30 96)
  • African-American .31 24 / (24 53)
  • More Visits (vs. Easy)
  • European-American .15 17 / (17 96)
  • African-American .33 26 / (26 53)

9
Odds Odds Ratio
  • More Calls (vs. Easy)
  • European-American .3125 (.2098 / .6713)
  • African-American .4528 (.2330 / .5146)
  • Odds Ratio 1.45 (.4528 / .3125)
  • 45 increase in the odds
  • More Visits (vs. Easy)
  • European-American .1771 (.1189 / .6713)
  • African-American .4905 (.2524 / .5146).
  • Odds Ratio 2.77 (.4905 / .1771)
  • 177 increase in the odds

10
Question Answer
  • What is the relationship between race and
    interview tracking effort?
  • The odds of requiring more calls, compared to
    being easy-to-track, are higher for
    African-Americans by a factor of 1.45 (45). The
    odds of requiring more visits, compared to being
    easy-to-track, are higher for African-Americans
    by a factor of 2.77 (177).

11
Multinomial Logistic Regression
  • Set of binary logistic regression models
    estimated simultaneously
  • Number of non-redundant binary logistic
    regression equations equals the number of
    categories of the DV minus one

12
Statistical Significance
  • Table 3.2
  • ?(Race, More Calls vs. Easy) ?(Race, More
    Visits vs. Easy) 0
  • Reject
  • Table 3.3
  • ?(Race, More Calls vs. Easy) ?(Race, More
    Visits vs. Easy) 0
  • Reject
  • Table 3.4
  • ?(Race, More Calls vs. Easy) 0
  • Dont Reject
  • ?(Race, More Visits vs. Easy) 0
  • Reject

13
Odds Ratios
  • OR(More Calls vs. Easy) 1.45
  • The odds of requiring more calls, compared to
    being easy-to-track, are not significantly
    different for European- and African-Americans.
  • OR(More Visits vs. Easy) 2.77
  • The odds of requiring more visits, compared to
    being easy-to-track, are higher for
    African-Americans by a factor of 2.77 (177).

14
Estimated Logits (L)
  • Table 3.4
  • L(More Calls vs. Easy) a BRaceXRace
  • L(More Calls vs. Easy) -1.163 (.371)(XRace)
  • L(More Visits vs. Easy) a BRaceXRace
  • L(More Visits vs. Easy) -1.731 (1.019)(XRace)

15
Logits to Odds
  • African-Americans (X 1)
  • L(More Calls vs. Easy) -.792 -1.163
    (.371)(1)
  • Odds e-.792 .45
  • L(More Visits vs. Easy) -.712 -1.731
    (1.019)(1)
  • Odds e-.712 .49

16
Logits to Probabilities
  • African-Americans, L(More Calls vs. Easy) -.792
  • African-Americans, L(More Visits vs. Easy) -.712

17
Question Answer
  • What is the relationship between race and
    interview tracking effort?
  • The odds of requiring more calls, compared to
    being easy-to-track, are not significantly
    different for European- and African-Americans.
  • The odds of requiring more visits, compared to
    being easy-to-track, are higher for
    African-Americans by a factor of 2.77 (177).

18
Single (Quantitative) IV Example
  • DV interview tracking effort
  • easy-to-interview and track mothers (Easy)
  • difficult-to-track mothers who required more
    telephone calls (MoreCalls)
  • difficult-to-track mothers who required more
    unscheduled home visits (MoreVisits)
  • IV years of education
  • N 246 mothers
  • What is the relationship between education and
    interview tracking effort?

19
Statistical Significance
  • Table 3.6
  • ?(Education, More Calls vs. Easy) ?(Education,
    More Visits vs. Easy) 0
  • Reject
  • Table 3.7
  • ?(Education, More Calls vs. Easy) 0
  • Dont Reject
  • ?(Education, More Visits vs. Easy) 0
  • Reject

20
Odds Ratios
  • OR(More Calls vs. Easy) .88
  • The odds of requiring more calls, compared to
    being easy-to-track, are not significantly
    associated with education.
  • OR(More Visits vs. Easy) .76
  • For every additional year of education the odds
    of needing more visits, compared to being
    easy-to-track, decrease by a factor of .76 (i.e.,
    -24.1).

21
Figures
  • Education.xls

22
Estimated Logits (L)
  • Table 3.7
  • X 12 (high school education)
  • L(More Calls vs. Easy) -.977 .583
    (-.130)(12)
  • L(More Visits vs. Easy) -1.235 2.077
    (-.276)(12)

23
Effect of Education on Tracking Effort (Logits)
24
Logits to Odds
  • X 12 (high school education)
  • Odds(More Calls vs. Easy) e-.977 .38
  • Odds(More Visits vs. Easy) e-1.235 .29

25
Effect of Education on Tracking Effort (Odds)
26
Logits to Probabilities
  • X 12 (high school education)

27
Effect of Education on Tracking Effort
(Probabilities)
28
Question Answer
  • What is the relationship between education and
    interview tracking effort?
  • The odds of requiring more calls, compared to
    being easy-to-track, are not significantly
    associated with education. For every additional
    year of education the odds of needing more
    visits, compared to being easy-to-track, decrease
    by a factor of .76 (i.e., -24.1).

29
Multiple IV Example
  • DV interview tracking effort
  • easy-to-interview and track mothers (Easy)
  • difficult-to-track mothers who required more
    telephone calls (MoreCalls)
  • difficult-to-track mothers who required more
    unscheduled home visits (MoreVisits)
  • IV race, 0 European-American, 1
    African-American
  • IV years of education
  • N 246 mothers

30
Multiple IV Example (contd)
  • What is the relationship between race and
    interview tracking effort, when controlling for
    education?

31
Statistical Significance
  • Table 3.8
  • ?(Race, More Calls vs. Easy) ?(Race, More
    Visits vs. Easy) ?(Ed, More Calls vs. Easy)
    ?(Ed, More Visits vs. Easy) 0
  • Reject
  • Table 3.9
  • ?(Race, More Calls vs. Easy) ?(Race, More
    Visits vs. Easy) 0
  • Reject
  • ?(Ed, More Calls vs. Easy) ?(Ed, More Visits
    vs. Easy) 0
  • Reject

32
Statistical Significance (contd)
  • Table 3.10
  • ?(Race, More Calls vs. Easy) 0
  • Dont reject
  • ?(Race, More Visits vs. Easy) 0
  • Reject
  • ?(Ed, More Calls vs. Easy) 0
  • Dont reject
  • ?(Ed, More Visits vs. Easy) 0
  • Reject

33
Odds Ratios Race
  • OR(More Calls vs. Easy) 1.36
  • The odds of requiring more calls, compared to
    being easy-to-track, are not significantly
    different for European- and African-Americans.
  • OR(More Visits vs. Easy) 2.48
  • The odds of requiring more visits, compared to
    being easy-to-track, are higher for
    African-Americans by a factor of 2.48 (148).

34
Odds Ratios Education
  • OR(More Calls vs. Easy) .89
  • The odds of requiring more calls, compared to
    being easy-to-track, are not significantly
    associated with education.
  • OR(More Visits vs. Easy) .77
  • For every additional year of education the odds
    of needing more visits, compared to being
    easy-to-track, decrease by a factor of .77 (i.e.,
    -23), when controlling for race.

35
Figures
  • Race Education.xls

36
Effect of Education on Tracking Effort for
African-Americans (Odds)
37
Effect of Education on Tracking Effort for
African-Americans (Probabilities)
38
Question Answer
  • What is the relationship between race and
    interview tracking effort, when controlling for
    education?
  • The odds of requiring more calls, compared to
    being easy-to-track, are not significantly
    different for European- and African-Americans,
    when controlling for education. The odds of
    requiring more visits, compared to being
    easy-to-track, are higher for African-Americans
    by a factor of 2.48 (148), when controlling for
    education.

39
Assumptions Necessary for Testing Hypotheses
  • Assumptions discussed in GZLM lecture
  • Independence of irrelevant alternatives (IIA)
  • Odds of one outcome (e.g., More Calls) relative
    to another (e.g., Easy) are not influenced by
    other alternatives (e.g., More Visits)

40
Model Evaluation
  • Create a set of binary DVs from the polytomous DV
  • recode TrackCat (10) (21) (3sysmis) into
    MoreCalls.
  • recode TrackCat (10) (2sysmis) (31) into
    MoreVisits.
  • Run separate binary logistic regressions
  • Use binary logistic regression methods to detect
    outliers and influential observations

41
Model Evaluation (contd)
  • Index plots
  • Leverage values
  • Standardized or unstandardized deviance residuals
  • Cooks D
  • Graph and compare observed and estimated counts

42
Analogs of R2
  • None in standard use and each may give different
    results
  • Typically much smaller than R2 values in linear
    regression
  • Difficult to interpret

43
Multicollinearity
  • SPSS multinomial logistic regression doesnt
    compute multicollinearity statistics
  • Use SPSS linear regression
  • Problematic levels
  • Tolerance lt .10 or
  • VIF gt 10

44
Additional Topics
  • Polytomous IVs
  • Curvilinear relationships
  • Interactions

45
Additional Regression Models for Polytomous DVs
  • Multinomial probit regression
  • Substantive results essentially indistinguishable
    from binary logistic regression
  • Choice between this and binary logistic
    regression largely one of convenience and
    discipline-specific convention
  • Many researchers prefer binary logistic
    regression because it provides odds ratios
    whereas probit regression does not, and binary
    logistic regression comes with a wider variety of
    fit statistics

46
Additional Regression Models for Polytomous DVs
(contd)
  • Discriminant analysis
  • Limited to continuous IVs
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com