6
$\begingroup$

I'm trying to understand how to interpret log odds ratios in logistic regression. Let's say I have the following output:

> mod1 = glm(factor(won) ~ bid, data=mydat, family=binomial(link="logit"))
> summary(mod1)

Call:
glm(formula = factor(won) ~ bid, family = binomial(link = "logit"), 
    data = mydat)

Deviance Residuals: 
    Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max  
-1.5464  -0.6990  -0.6392  -0.5321   2.0124  

Coefficients:
              Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)    
(Intercept) -2.133e+00  1.947e-02 -109.53   <2e-16 ***
bid          2.494e-03  5.058e-05   49.32   <2e-16 ***
---
Signif. codes:  0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1 

(Dispersion parameter for binomial family taken to be 1)

    Null deviance: 83081  on 80337  degrees of freedom
Residual deviance: 80645  on 80336  degrees of freedom
AIC: 80649

Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 4

So my equation would look like: $$\Pr(Y=1) = \frac{1}{1 + \exp\left(-[-2.13 + 0.002\times(\text{bid})]\right)}$$

From here I calculated probabilities from all bid levels. enter image description here

I have been using this graph to say that at a 1000 bid, the probability of winning is x. At any given bid level, the probability of winning is x.

I have a feeling that my interpretation is wrong because I'm not considering that these are log-odds. How should I really be interpreting this plot/these results?

$\endgroup$
9
$\begingroup$

If you're using the equation you list below your code, I think you're OK. It's true that the numbers inside that equation are log odds, but once you've solved for $\text{Pr}(Y=1)$, you do have a probability. As far as I can tell, you are not misinterpreting your results.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I agree; and, for edification, the exp inside the parentheses in the denominator is needed precisely because the numbers inside the parentheses are log odds. $\endgroup$ – Peter Flom Apr 11 '12 at 20:35
  • $\begingroup$ For more detailed information on log odds, odds ratios and predicted probabilities, it may help to read my answer here: Interpretation of simple predictions to odds ratios in logistic regression. $\endgroup$ – gung Jun 3 '13 at 18:10
1
$\begingroup$

I think it depends on what you mean with interpreting. If you are trying to understand whether the equation for $Pr(Y=1)$ is correct, then I would say yes.

If you want to find an interpretation of the equation itself, then you should consider odds ratios; a unital increase of bid (here you have no problem in fixing all the other covariates!) implies an odds ratio increase of $\exp(0.002)>1$.

I would not try to do the same with the "log-odds" though. The above interpretation is already quite explicit and widely used.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.