Is the effect larger in group A or B? It depends: understanding results from nonlinear probability models
Demographers and other social scientists often study effect heterogeneity (defined here as differences in outcome-predictor associations across groups defined by the values of a third variable) to understand how inequalities evolve between groups or how groups differentially benefit from treatments....
Saved in:
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Other Authors: | |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
2023
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10356/164284 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Institution: | Nanyang Technological University |
Language: | English |
id |
sg-ntu-dr.10356-164284 |
---|---|
record_format |
dspace |
spelling |
sg-ntu-dr.10356-1642842023-03-05T15:31:48Z Is the effect larger in group A or B? It depends: understanding results from nonlinear probability models Bloome, Deirdre Ang, Shannon School of Social Sciences Social sciences::Sociology Interaction Moderation Demographers and other social scientists often study effect heterogeneity (defined here as differences in outcome-predictor associations across groups defined by the values of a third variable) to understand how inequalities evolve between groups or how groups differentially benefit from treatments. Yet answering the question "Is the effect larger in group A or group B?" is surprisingly difficult. In fact, the answer sometimes reverses across scales. For example, researchers might conclude that the effect of education on mortality is larger among women than among men if they quantify education's effect on an odds-ratio scale, but their conclusion might flip (to indicate a larger effect among men) if they instead quantify education's effect on a percentage-point scale. We illuminate this flipped-signs phenomenon in the context of nonlinear probability models, which were used in about one third of articles published in Demography in 2018-2019. Although methodologists are aware that flipped signs can occur, applied researchers have not integrated this insight into their work. We provide formal inequalities that researchers can use to easily determine if flipped signs are a problem in their own applications. We also share practical tips to help researchers handle flipped signs and, thus, generate clear and substantively correct descriptions of effect heterogeneity. Our findings advance researchers' ability to accurately characterize population variation. Published version We gratefully acknowledge support from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (research grant P01HD087155 and center grant P2CHD041028). 2023-01-13T02:50:39Z 2023-01-13T02:50:39Z 2022 Journal Article Bloome, D. & Ang, S. (2022). Is the effect larger in group A or B? It depends: understanding results from nonlinear probability models. Demography, 59(4), 1459-1488. https://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00703370-10109444 0070-3370 https://hdl.handle.net/10356/164284 10.1215/00703370-10109444 35894791 2-s2.0-85135525980 4 59 1459 1488 en Demography © 2022 The Authors. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). application/pdf |
institution |
Nanyang Technological University |
building |
NTU Library |
continent |
Asia |
country |
Singapore Singapore |
content_provider |
NTU Library |
collection |
DR-NTU |
language |
English |
topic |
Social sciences::Sociology Interaction Moderation |
spellingShingle |
Social sciences::Sociology Interaction Moderation Bloome, Deirdre Ang, Shannon Is the effect larger in group A or B? It depends: understanding results from nonlinear probability models |
description |
Demographers and other social scientists often study effect heterogeneity (defined here as differences in outcome-predictor associations across groups defined by the values of a third variable) to understand how inequalities evolve between groups or how groups differentially benefit from treatments. Yet answering the question "Is the effect larger in group A or group B?" is surprisingly difficult. In fact, the answer sometimes reverses across scales. For example, researchers might conclude that the effect of education on mortality is larger among women than among men if they quantify education's effect on an odds-ratio scale, but their conclusion might flip (to indicate a larger effect among men) if they instead quantify education's effect on a percentage-point scale. We illuminate this flipped-signs phenomenon in the context of nonlinear probability models, which were used in about one third of articles published in Demography in 2018-2019. Although methodologists are aware that flipped signs can occur, applied researchers have not integrated this insight into their work. We provide formal inequalities that researchers can use to easily determine if flipped signs are a problem in their own applications. We also share practical tips to help researchers handle flipped signs and, thus, generate clear and substantively correct descriptions of effect heterogeneity. Our findings advance researchers' ability to accurately characterize population variation. |
author2 |
School of Social Sciences |
author_facet |
School of Social Sciences Bloome, Deirdre Ang, Shannon |
format |
Article |
author |
Bloome, Deirdre Ang, Shannon |
author_sort |
Bloome, Deirdre |
title |
Is the effect larger in group A or B? It depends: understanding results from nonlinear probability models |
title_short |
Is the effect larger in group A or B? It depends: understanding results from nonlinear probability models |
title_full |
Is the effect larger in group A or B? It depends: understanding results from nonlinear probability models |
title_fullStr |
Is the effect larger in group A or B? It depends: understanding results from nonlinear probability models |
title_full_unstemmed |
Is the effect larger in group A or B? It depends: understanding results from nonlinear probability models |
title_sort |
is the effect larger in group a or b? it depends: understanding results from nonlinear probability models |
publishDate |
2023 |
url |
https://hdl.handle.net/10356/164284 |
_version_ |
1759854099266797568 |