What is a unique predictor?

A well-known property of regression models is that they capture the unique contribution of a predictor. By “unique” we mean the effect of the predictor (on the criterion) if the other predictor(s) is/are held constant.

sebastiansauer.github.io - A predictor's unique contribution - (visual) demonstration

How far can a horse travel in a day without stopping?

Horses in the past used to frequently travel up to 35 miles per day, but now they are rarely able to go more than 25 miles in one day. It is...

Last updated Apr 24, 2021

Is blackjack a skill or luck?

Purely based on statistics, some casino gamblers get lucky and win money. Blackjack, however, can be beaten based on skill—no luck involved. Jan...

Last updated Jan 16, 2021

Make Your Bookie Cry And Pull The Hair By Generating $23,187

Promotion

All about storks

There’s a correlation between babies and storks. Counties with lots of storks enjoy large number of babies and v.v. However, I have children, I know the storks are not overly involved in that business, so says the teacher (polite laughters in the audience). Once we consider a third variable, call it nature-level, we see that the correlation between storks and babies vanishes. Assume that nature-level and storks are correlated - in nature-rich areas there are a lot of storks. Assume further that nature-level and the amount of babies are correlated - in nature-rich areas people have relatively many babies. That’s why we find a correlation between babies and storks (“spurious” it is called), which is (fully) attributable to the nature-level. This is all well-known but it helps to see it in real data. That’s the objective of this post.

Tip, sex, and total_bill - two simple bivariate analyses

Let’s have a look at the tips dataset.

data ( tips , package = "reshape2" )

And load some datajudo packages.

library ( tidyverse )

First, simple bivariate assocations for sex-tip and total_bill-tip.

Is there an assocation between sex and tip?

ggplot ( tips ) + ggplot2 :: aes ( x = sex , y = tip ) + geom_jitter ( color = "grey80" ) + geom_jitter ( data = tips , aes ( color = sex )) + stat_summary ( fun.y = mean , color = "red" , geom = "line" , size = 2 , group = 1 ) + stat_summary ( fun.y = mean , color = "red" , geom = "point" , size = 5 , group = 1 , alpha = .5 ) tips2 <- select ( tips , - sex ) tips %>% ggplot () + aes ( x = total_bill , y = tip ) + geom_point ( data = tips2 , color = "grey80" ) + geom_point ( aes ( color = sex )) + facet_wrap ( ~ sex )

It appears that men do tip slightly more than women do.

tips %>% group_by ( sex ) %>% summarise ( tip_sex_mean = mean ( tip ), tip_sex_md = median ( tip )) ## # A tibble: 2 x 3 ## sex tip_sex_mean tip_sex_md ## ## 1 Female 2.833448 2.75 ## 2 Male 3.089618 3.00 Ok, some 25 Cent difference, in favor of men. Some association is present in the data.

What does 12 1 odds pay?

12 to 1 odds payout If you wager a bet on a 12/1 betting odds selection and you win, your total payout will be 13.00 which is your stake back plus...

Last updated Nov 22, 2021

What is the best and safest gambling site?

Best Gambling Sites Super Slots: Best gambling app. BetOnline: Top pick for sports betting. Bitstarz: Best for crypto gamblers. Slots.lv: Great...

Last updated Dec 8, 2019

Promotion

Let’s run a regression on that, just to double-check.

lm ( tip ~ sex , data = tips )

## ## Call: ## lm(formula = tip ~ sex, data = tips) ## ## Coefficients: ## (Intercept) sexMale ## 2.8334 0.2562

Ok, confirmed.

Now, what about the association of total_bill and tip?

tips %>% ggplot + aes ( x = total_bill , y = tip ) + geom_point ()

Oh, clearly, some correlation is present between total_bill and tip.

tips %>% summarise ( cor_tip_bill = cor ( tip , total_bill ))

## cor_tip_bill ## 1 0.6757341

And let’s have a look at the slope of the regression.

lm ( tip ~ total_bill , data = tips )

## ## Call: ## lm(formula = tip ~ total_bill, data = tips) ## ## Coefficients: ## (Intercept) total_bill ## 0.9203 0.1050

Multivariate analysis

Now let’s do that in one run:

lm ( tip ~ total_bill + sex , data = tips )

## ## Call: ## lm(formula = tip ~ total_bill + sex, data = tips) ## ## Coefficients: ## (Intercept) total_bill sexMale ## 0.93328 0.10523 -0.02661 Notice that the slope of the predictor total_bill has not changed much. But sex did! So, the unique contribution of sex is very small, about 2 Cent, and in favor of women when considered in junction with total_bill!

Let’s visualize the multivariate appraoch

First, for easier visualization, let’s bin total_bill in say, 5, bins.

tips $ bill_bins <- cut_interval ( tips $ total_bill , n = 5 )

Now let’s plot all three variables in one go.

tips %>% ggplot + aes ( x = bill_bins , y = tip , fill = sex ) + geom_boxplot () + geom_point ( alpha = .5 ) We see that females do tip more than men when the 5 bins of total_bill are considered each in isolation. For 4 of the 5 bins we find that the median of the women is higher than that of the men. Only in the 5th, ie., highest bin, we found that men tip higher. However, this bin is slightly populated, so we may negligate it. In sum, looking at each bin of total_bill - women tip more than men do!

Depicted differently:

tips %>% ggplot () + aes ( x = total_bill , y = tip ) + geom_point ( data = tips2 , color = "grey80" ) + geom_point ( aes ( color = sex )) + facet_wrap ( ~ sex )

Dichotomize total_bill

Can I gamble at 18?

A few states welcome anyone age 18 and older to gamble at local casinos, including California (with a few exceptions). California is home to...

Last updated Aug 15, 2019

Can a girl drive F1?

After assessing the barriers young female drivers face with entering the F1 pyramid, it became clear that they do not have the same amount of...

Last updated Nov 28, 2020

Promotion

Maybe even more vivid is we we do not bin total_bill in 5 bins, but just in two. tips $ bill_bins <- cut_interval ( tips $ total_bill , n = 2 )

Again, let’s plot the three variables.

tips %>% ggplot + aes ( x = bill_bins , y = tip , fill = sex ) + geom_boxplot () + geom_point ( alpha = .5 ) We find that women seem to tip slightly more than men do; at least not less.

A Simpson case

What happens can be considered a Simpson’s paradox, based on the fact that men spend more than women do (higher total_bill ). Even though they tip less or equally to women it appears they tip “in sum” (not considering total_bill ) more simply because total_bill and tip are related. Let’s dichotomize total_bill and see which sex group (females or males) occur more frequently. tips %>% mutate ( bill_di = ntile ( total_bill , n = 2 ), bill_di_f = if_else ( bill_di == 1 , "low" , "hi" )) %>% count ( sex , bill_di_f ) %>% # gather(bill_group, n, -n) %>% ggplot () + aes ( x = sex , fill = bill_di_f , y = n ) + geom_col ( position = "fill" ) We see that the in the male group, high values occurr more frequently.

Path model

sex_male has a positive effect on total_bill ; and total_bill in turn on tip . But sex_male does not exert much of an influence on tip anymore, after controling for total_bill (in fact, the positive effect turned to a weak negative impact). library ( DiagrammeR ) mermaid ( " graph LR total_bill-->tip sex_male-->total_bill sex_male---tip " )

Conclusion

That kind of “swapping” of the regression coefficient is a frequent observation in (multiple) regression. We may conclude that the multivariate analyses with 3 variables is more adequate than the bivariate analyses with one predictor only. However, a caveat is that we can never be sure that this swapping process is now complete. Maybe we are missing out some more variable that will again make the coefficients swap. Alas, this we cannot know in observational reseach. That’s why observational data should not be overinterpreted. Of course, even if commonly speak of “effects” this language should never be taken as indicative of causal effects. Causal effects is nothing that can firmly be established by statistics. Causality claims rest of more logical and substantive argument.

sebastiansauer.github.io - A predictor's unique contribution - (visual) demonstration

Can a spread be negative?

Negative spread is a condition when the selling price or the current price is cheaper than the purchase price from the price fluctuation of target...

Last updated Apr 20, 2022

What is a $1 trifecta?

a $1 Trifecta Key Box: 1,3/5,7 would cost $12 and is made up of two trifecta bets that include a box; of 1 with 5,7 and 3 with 5,7 (the 1 AND 3 are...

Last updated Oct 10, 2022

Promotion

Should I sell crypto when its high?

If your investment has shot up in value, you should probably sell at least a portion of it. For example, you could sell what you originally...

Last updated Oct 6, 2022

Promotion

What does +1.5 mean?

In order to help you understand betting odds, we will use +1.5 as an example. When you see a +1.5 in front of a team's name, that means that they...

Last updated Sep 12, 2018