0

My question is, whether there is any way to (somewhat) compare the marginal effect of a GLM estimate to an OLS estimate. As in, "since the OLS and GLM results are very similar, I will favour OLS because of ease of interpretation"

If the answer is a hard no, I would still be very interested in why this is a no.

In my example Crime is a dummy variable (I have recoded it as such).

My example output is as follows:

lm_1st <- glm(lm_form_1st, ,data=full)
                            Estimate Std. Error t value             Pr(&gt;|t|)    

(Intercept) 0.7896258 0.0792442 9.964 < 0.0000000000000002 *** Crime 0.3824961 0.0214503 17.832 < 0.0000000000000002 ***

glm_1st <- glm(glm_form_1st, family="quasipoisson", data=full); summary(glm_1st) summary(margins(glm_1st, variables = "Crime"))

                            Estimate Std. Error t value             Pr(&gt;|t|)    

(Intercept) -0.2140713 0.0875054 -2.446 0.014438 *
Crime 0.3524041 0.0221681 15.897 < 0.0000000000000002 **

factor AME SE z p lower upper Crime 0.3302 0.0209 15.7771 0.0000 0.2892 0.3712 # Marginal effect of the GLM

Related questions:

How does OLS regression relate to generalised linear modelling

How to determine if GLS improves on OLS?

The interpretation of a positive glm coefficient, with a negative marginal effect

Tom
  • 458

0 Answers0