5
$\begingroup$

There are multiple reasons for applying standardisation/mean centre for predictors before putting them into a regression model. However, in the literature, some people do not do so or even argue against this idea. They say that it is not necessary to do standardisation/mean centre. Actually what are their reasons? I heard that standardisation/mean centre changes the interpretation of main effect, but not the interaction effect. Is it true? Are there any drawbacks to standardisation/mean centre before applying the predictors into a regression model?

The links below are some previous discussions on the benefits of standardisation/mean centre. But in order to be as critical as possible, I'd like to know the backside of standardisation/mean centre.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ One disadvantage is that you lose the original scaling. That might be important when you read the estimated coefficients. $\endgroup$
    – SmallChess
    Oct 30, 2017 at 5:03
  • $\begingroup$ @SmallChess, true, but standardization is normally undone after the estimation, so the coefficients for the original variables are obtained. $\endgroup$
    – Richard Hardy
    Oct 30, 2017 at 6:22
  • $\begingroup$ The major benefits and drawbacks of any linear transform will often come down to interpretability, I think, and the downside comes when people are not able to properly interpret a standard deviation. I don’t think it’s necessarily ever wrong to do so - it just isn’t necessary and is often more cosmetic. (Not to downplay the importance of clear reporting.) $\endgroup$
    – RickyB
    Nov 8, 2017 at 13:47

0

Reset to default

Your Answer

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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.