Cross Validated Asked by user553480 on November 2, 2021
I am modelling the number of jobs in a year, with a random intercept to account for regional variation.
How do I interpret the model output when using the model to predict/ for inference?
For example, using the log-link function I would do the following to work out the expected number of jobs in year 2 in London:
exp(Intercept + Year*2 + London_intercept) = exp(0.23290 + -0.13369*2 + 0.42820729) = 1.482496
But this value is way too low, I expect way more jobs than 1.5 in a year. Do I instead interpret it as 70% increase over the mean? If so what is the mean? Could someone clarify what to do please?
summary output:
> summary(m8)
Generalized linear mixed model fit by maximum likelihood (Laplace Approximation) ['glmerMod']
Family: Negative Binomial(0.9321) ( log )
Formula: Jobs ~ 1 + Year + (1 | Region)
Data: df_jobs
AIC BIC logLik deviance df.resid
3554.5 3575.9 -1773.3 3546.5 1564
Scaled residuals:
Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
-0.7836 -0.6187 -0.5081 0.3613 7.2595
Random effects:
Groups Name Variance Std.Dev.
Region (Intercept) 0.1597 0.3996
Number of obs: 1568, groups: Region, 14
Fixed effects:
Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
(Intercept) 0.23290 0.13610 1.711 0.087 .
Year -0.13369 0.01572 -8.502 <2e-16 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Correlation of Fixed Effects:
(Intr)
Year -0.536
Random intercepts for region:
$Region
(Intercept)
East Midlands -0.02413869
East of England 0.18654921
Kent, Surrey & Sussex 0.14610941
London 0.42820729
North East -0.42892509
North West 0.48852281
Northern Ireland -0.26330415
Scotland 0.41420383
South West 0.15415043
Thames Valley -0.80072297
Wales -0.05975189
Wessex -0.53037342
West Midlands 0.15126500
Yorkshire & Humber 0.21339728
This model has the following interpretations:
The estimate fo Year
is the negative binomial regression estimate for a one unit increase in year
. Assuming that each "unit" is 1 year then for each additional year, the difference in the logs of expected number of jobs is expected to decrease by -0.13369, exponentiating this gives 0.875 which means that overall there is a 12.5% decreasee in jobs for every 1 year increase
You can add in the intercept and random effects to obtain individual estimates for each region - as you did - however these will be shrunken due to partial pooling. Also, note that your formula
exp(Intercept + Year*2 + London_intercept) = exp(0.23290 + -0.13369*2 + 0.42820729) = 1.482496
means that there is a 48% increase in jobs associated with a 2 year increase in Year
If you want unshrunken estimates then you should fit fixed effects for Year
It is common in models such as these to have a nonlinear association with time, so you might want to consider adding an additional nonlinear term (eg quadratic) or using splines. If using the former it may be best to centre the Year
variable first.
Another possibility is to allow for the "effect"of Year
to vary by region, by fitting random slopes:
Jobs ~ 1 + Year + (Year | Region)
Answered by Robert Long on November 2, 2021
Get help from others!
Recent Answers
Recent Questions
© 2024 TransWikia.com. All rights reserved. Sites we Love: PCI Database, UKBizDB, Menu Kuliner, Sharing RPP