Relationships Between Full and Layer Models with Applications to Level Merging

Analysis of a large dimensional contingency table is quite involved. Models corresponding to layers of a contingency table are easier to analyze than the full model. Relationships between the interaction parameters of the full log-linear model and that of its corresponding layer models are obtained. These relationships are not only useful to reduce the analysis but also useful to interpret various hierarchical models. We obtain these relationships for layers of one variable, and extend the results for the case when layers of more than one variable are considered. We also establish, under conditional independence, relationships between the interaction parameters of the full model and that of the corresponding marginal models. We discuss the concept of merging of factor levels based on these interaction parameters. Finally, we use the relationships between layer models and full model to obtain conditions for level merging based on layer interaction parameters. Several examples are discussed to illustrate the results.     

Simpson's paradox and the Bayes factor

A counter-example presented by Lindley to Aitkin's posterior Bayes factor is examined. The paradoxical feature of the counter-example is found to be a simple case of Simpson's paradox.     

A general condition for avoiding effect reversal after marginalization

Summary.  The paper examines the effect of marginalizing over a possibly unobserved background variable on the conditional relation between a response and an explanatory variable. In particular it is shown that some conclusions derived from least squares regression theory apply in general to testing independence for arbitrary distributions. It is also shown that the general condition of independence of the explanatory variable and the background ensures that mono- tonicity of dependence is preserved after marginalization. Relations with effect reversal and with collapsibility are sketched.     

Estimating a Marginal Causal Odds Ratio Subject to Confounding

Odds ratios are frequently used to describe the relationship between a binary treatment or exposure and a binary outcome. An odds ratio can be interpreted as a causal effect or a measure of association, depending on whether it involves potential outcomes or the actual outcome. An odds ratio can also be characterized as marginal versus conditional, depending on whether it involves conditioning on covariates. This article proposes a method for estimating a marginal causal odds ratio subject to confounding. The proposed method is based on a logistic regression model relating the outcome to the treatment indicator and potential confounders. Simulation results show that the proposed method performs reasonably well in moderate-sized samples and may even offer an efficiency gain over the direct method based on the sample odds ratio in the absence of confounding. The method is illustrated with a real example concerning coronary heart disease.