0
$\begingroup$

If I have a variable that, considering some omitted factor, should have fallen by a higher amount than when it is not there - would that be a downward bias? I.e. the decrease is not large enough, so if I think in absolute terms (corresponding to an increase not being large enough) I would call that a downward bias. Does that carry over here? I am thinking it does :-)

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think the use of bias here is correct. What is the context? $\endgroup$ Jan 15, 2019 at 11:26
  • $\begingroup$ It is in the context of the effect of a change in one variable on the other. So say I change variable A by 1%, that changes B by -0.6% percent for example. Now, there might be an effect of B back on A not taken into account, such that A would actually have changed to a 0.8% change instead of 1%. So in principle, the effect on B on -0.6% actually corresponds to a change in A of 0.8% rather than 1%. In that way, for a 1% change in A, B should actually change downwards by more than 0.6% $\endgroup$
    – user469216
    Jan 15, 2019 at 12:39

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.