4
$\begingroup$

I have a situation as the one described in the links below:

Interpreting proportions that sum to one as independent variables in linear regression

Predictor variables sum up to 1 but not necessarily correlated - is it a problem?

i.e., multiple collinearity due to having proportions that sum up to one as predictors (in my case, it's the proportion/percentage of people for mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive age groups).

I feel the same discomfort expressed here:

https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2018/07/10/wants-model-proportion-given-predictors-sum-1/

Removing the constant is not an option since I am running an ordered logit regressions, where I read there's no constant:

https://www.statalist.org/forums/forum/general-stata-discussion/general/704001-exclude-constant-in-stata-generalized-ordered-logistic-regression

Is there an alternative to arbitrarily chose a group as reference category and omit the related variable from the regression? The point is: I'd like to use generalized ordered logistic regression, so to evaluate the "proportionality of odds" assumption for each variable. Clearly, in this way the selected model would change basing on the reference category I choose. How could I avoid such arbitrariness?

$\endgroup$

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.