Print

Print


*****  To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org  *****

Dear Matthew,

Those two models are very different in both the underlying assumptions and
the specifications. The first one is a SAR model which assumes that the
errors are multivariate normal distributed, hence, no iid observations, and
thus, the likelihood function is different from what you would observe in a
plain OLS. Also, the spautolm includes the autocorrelation term when you
specify listwd, so, if discrep_net_prop_more.W is your exposure terms, it
means that you are including it twice but in the wrong way. Instead, you
should type something like:

spautolm(formula = BLQFMHEDWM.W ~ 1, listw = w.list.trunc,
    family = "SAR", zero.policy = TRUE)

For example. The autocorrelation term is the Lambda coefficient which is
reported afterward.

The lm, on the other hand, runs an OLS model in which the errors are
assumed to be iid making that type of model (including an exposure term)
not valid as your estimates will be biased by construction (unless you are
using a lagged exposure). A good reference on spatial econometrics is here:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cairn.info_resume.php-3FID-5FARTICLE-3DREI-5F123-5F0019&d=DwIFaQ&c=pZJPUDQ3SB9JplYbifm4nt2lEVG5pWx2KikqINpWlZM&r=uXI5O6HThk1ULkPyaT6h2Ws3RKNKSY__GQ4DuS9UHhs&m=PxnG00giqZaInRUpyBLY8dnx3rDpWXLl50MHidSIzNg&s=0dPfjY1EATP9i8p6rwsEDlE_TKqQPRIrAUzN4vF_zbY&e= (LeSage, 2008)

HIH

George G. Vega Yon
+1 (626) 381 8171
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ggvy.cl&d=DwIFaQ&c=pZJPUDQ3SB9JplYbifm4nt2lEVG5pWx2KikqINpWlZM&r=uXI5O6HThk1ULkPyaT6h2Ws3RKNKSY__GQ4DuS9UHhs&m=PxnG00giqZaInRUpyBLY8dnx3rDpWXLl50MHidSIzNg&s=d72eE9K3s1s2o8jo9_qRo7k43alDjnreCz61QrpgteA&e=

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 2:43 PM, Meisel, Matthew <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> ***** To join INSNA, visit https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.insna.org&d=DwIFaQ&c=pZJPUDQ3SB9JplYbifm4nt2lEVG5pWx2KikqINpWlZM&r=uXI5O6HThk1ULkPyaT6h2Ws3RKNKSY__GQ4DuS9UHhs&m=PxnG00giqZaInRUpyBLY8dnx3rDpWXLl50MHidSIzNg&s=Wl5CklY_iDJWTdXQgX4tID9UsYEWvN4GqwQvPC9k6UI&e= *****
> Dear all,
>
> My mentor has a large sociocentric network dataset (N = 1342) and I am
> trying to analyze the data using network autocorrelation models. When I run
> a model in R using the spautolm function and then I run the same model
> using the lm function, I get incredibly different results (the effects are
> significant but in different directions), and I have no idea on why these
> two methods would provide such vastly different results. See the models
> below. FYI, the predictor is dichotomous and the outcome is continuous. If
> you have any thoughts, please let me know, cause I do not know which
> results to trust.
>
> Best,
> Matt
>
> Call: spautolm(formula = BLQFMHEDWM.W ~ discrep_net_prop_more.W, listw =
> w.list.trunc,
>     family = "SAR", zero.policy = TRUE)
>
> Residuals:
>      Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max
> -5.71857 -1.19085 -0.49541  0.55372 15.64806
>
> Coefficients:
>                         Estimate Std. Error z value  Pr(>|z|)
> (Intercept)              1.64796    0.40402  4.0789 4.524e-05
> discrep_net_prop_more.W -1.30912    0.18460 -7.0916 1.325e-12
>
> Lambda: 0.83807 LR test value: 425.13 p-value: < 2.22e-16
> Numerical Hessian standard error of lambda: 0.030919
>
> Log likelihood: -2680.358
> ML residual variance (sigma squared): 5.0308, (sigma: 2.2429)
> Number of observations: 1178
> Number of parameters estimated: 4
> AIC: 5368.7
>
>
> Call: lm(formula = BLQFMHEDWM.W ~ discrep_net_prop_more.W, data = subject)
>
> Residuals:
>     Min      1Q  Median      3Q     Max
> -2.2335 -1.7280 -1.7280  0.7665 18.2720
>
> Coefficients:
>                         Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
> (Intercept)              1.72799    0.08878  19.465   <2e-16 ***
> discrep_net_prop_more.W  0.50554    0.23578   2.144   0.0322 *
> ---
> Signif. codes:  0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
>
> Residual standard error: 2.823 on 1176 degrees of freedom
> Multiple R-squared:  0.003894, Adjusted R-squared:  0.003047
> F-statistic: 4.597 on 1 and 1176 DF,  p-value: 0.03223
>
> --
> Matthew K. Meisel, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor
> Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies
> Department of Behavioral and Social Sciences
> Brown University | School of Public Health
> Box G-S121-4 Providence, RI 02903
> Phone: (401) 863-6590
> [log in to unmask]
> _____________________________________________________________________
> SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
> network researchers (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.insna.org&d=DwIFaQ&c=pZJPUDQ3SB9JplYbifm4nt2lEVG5pWx2KikqINpWlZM&r=uXI5O6HThk1ULkPyaT6h2Ws3RKNKSY__GQ4DuS9UHhs&m=PxnG00giqZaInRUpyBLY8dnx3rDpWXLl50MHidSIzNg&s=Wl5CklY_iDJWTdXQgX4tID9UsYEWvN4GqwQvPC9k6UI&e=). To unsubscribe, send an email
> message to [log in to unmask] containing the line UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET
> in the body of the message.

_____________________________________________________________________
SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send
an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line
UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.