I used some categorical variables as predictors to a negative binomial model. The dependent variable is numerical. I used glm.nb in R and the results show relative coefficients of one category respective to another category.

Then I tried using lm.beta to standardize the coefficients, but still the results are relative. How can I interpret a positive versus negative coefficient here?


1 Answer 1


I'm going to answer this using a Poisson model, which is precisely a negative binomial model without overdispersion, because the math will be simpler. The poisson model predicts the probability of observing $y_i$ to be a particular non-negative discrete number $$P(y_i|X) = \dfrac{\exp(-\lambda_i)\lambda_i ^{y_i}}{y_i!}$$

The conditional mean of this distribution $\lambda_i$. $$E[y_i|x_i] = \lambda_i = \exp(x_i\beta)$$ $$\log \lambda_i = x_i\beta$$ The conditional variance of the poisson model is also $\lambda_i$, but the variance of the negative binomial model is $\lambda_i + \alpha \lambda_i$. This is the only practical difference between the two models for the purposes of this answer.

This is effectively a log-linear model. So the marginal effect of $x$ on $\lambda$ can be shown as

$$\dfrac{\partial E[y|x]}{\partial x} = \dfrac{\partial\lambda_i}{\partial x} = \exp(\beta)$$

So if you have a negative $\beta$ for a dummy variable $x$, you can say that "on average, $x$ lowers the expected value of $\log(y)$ by $\beta$*100 percent."

  • 4
    $\begingroup$ You can also get a multiplicative effect by exponentiating the coefficients. For example if $\beta_D=.43$, then folks with $D=1$ are expected to have $\exp \{.43\} \approx 1.54$ times higher outcome (holding everything else constant). This is the incidence rate ratio interpretation. $\endgroup$
    – dimitriy
    Jan 24, 2013 at 20:47

Your Answer

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

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