[Limdep Nlogit List] weighting and proportions data

Durham, Cathy cathy.durham at oregonstate.edu
Wed Aug 9 08:41:16 EST 2006

George, I wouldn't interepret that as an appropriate use of weighting
since you just have the one you don't have N choices made, and of course
they will all be huge. If I was reveiwing it I might think it was
plausible to weight by the number of farms in the region, since that is
the number decision makers.
-----Original Message-----
From: limdep-bounces at limdep.itls.usyd.edu.au
[mailto:limdep-bounces at limdep.itls.usyd.edu.au]On Behalf Of George
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 10:26 PM
To: Limdep and Nlogit Mailing List
Subject: [Limdep Nlogit List] weighting and proportions data

Hello All,

I have a data set with proportions data for land allocated to different
So the data is proportion of acreage in a region applying a particular
Looking at related literature, a number of studies run multinomial logit
regressions (implicitly) treating land units as N.
There seem to me to be 3 problems here:
(1) This has, as the LIMDEP manual says, "the surprising side effect of
producing implausibly
small standard errors"  because each unit of land is treated as an
(2) Further, one can get even smaller standard errors by changing units
(e.g. from square miles to hectares to acres)
(3) Because individuals are making decisions about multiple units of
doesn't seem to fit the notion of a binomial trial
(unless you think of a farmer carring out 500 "separate" trials on 500

I'd welcome any ideas about a defensible way to weight the data.


George F

Limdep site list
Limdep at limdep.itls.usyd.edu.au

More information about the Limdep mailing list