Turn on suggestions

Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.

Showing results for

- JMP User Community
- :
- Discussions
- :
- Confusion over Logistic Regression example

- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page

Highlighted

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

Created:
Sep 8, 2012 11:27 PM
| Last Modified: Oct 18, 2016 1:01 PM
(6873 views)

Hi all

I am new to SAS and advanced statistics and am having problems understanding the result that a logistic regression is showing me.

I am doing this work for a job interview and thus desperately need some advice promptly.

I am analysing NFL trends for qualifying to the Play Offs

I would expect a stat called Combined EPA to be heavily correlated with qualifying for the NFL Playoffs.

When Qualifying on the Y axis and Combined EPA on the X axis I get the following result:

This appears to imply that as Combined EPA increases the probability of not qualifying increases, which is the opposite of my hypothesis

However I then plotted the graph with the axes switched and got the following result

Clearly from this graph teams that qualify have on average a higher Combined EPA then teams that didnt qualify.

Given these 2 graphs could someone please explain to me the correlation in the 1st graph between Not qualifying and a higher Combined EPA?

Thank you in advance for any assistance

D Scott

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions

Highlighted

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

The two plots are compatible. In the first plot all "Yes" are placed above the line and All "No" below the line. The line is the predicted probability for "No". So at EPA = 0 about 70% is expected to not qualify. At 300 virtually all will qualify.

JMP uses the alphabetic order of categories by default. If you prefer the the inverse curve set the reverse order in the value ordering property for the EPA column.

3 REPLIES 3

Highlighted

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

The two plots are compatible. In the first plot all "Yes" are placed above the line and All "No" below the line. The line is the predicted probability for "No". So at EPA = 0 about 70% is expected to not qualify. At 300 virtually all will qualify.

JMP uses the alphabetic order of categories by default. If you prefer the the inverse curve set the reverse order in the value ordering property for the EPA column.

Highlighted
##

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

Re: Confusion over Logistic Regression example

Hi MS

Thanks for the assistance, that makes perfect sense now.

I got the job in the end and im glad I can use the logistic regression tool now.

Regards

DScott

Highlighted
##

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

Re: Confusion over Logistic Regression example

An alternative way of looking at the curve is to use the profiler. This makes the meaning of the curve more apparent.

Dave

-Dave

Article Labels

There are no labels assigned to this post.