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(>|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(>|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
crime? – Sextus Empiricus Apr 17 '21 at 09:34Crimeis a dummy variable. Sorry, I realise that I should have added that. I'll add it with my question about marginal effects as well. – Tom Apr 17 '21 at 09:44