A Does centering variables for regression always result in unchanged coefficients?

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter monsmatglad
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    interaction ols
Click For Summary
Centering variables in multiple linear regression can lead to changes in the coefficients of non-interaction terms when interactions are present. While the coefficients of non-interaction variables may change, those of interaction terms and variables without interactions remain unchanged. This phenomenon is attributed to the properties of linearity, where translation does not affect certain coefficients. The discussion clarifies that the statement about unchanged coefficients primarily applies to non-interaction variables. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for accurate interpretation of regression results involving interactions.
monsmatglad
Messages
75
Reaction score
0
I am studying mean-centering for multiple linear regression (ols).
Specifically I'm talking about the situation when there is interaction.
When centering variables for a regression analysis, my literature tells me that the coefficients do not change? But when there is some sort of interaction between the variables, the coefficients of the non-interaction terms (the variables that take part in the interaction, but are also represented individually) of the variables do in fact change.

When it is said that when centering the variables, "the coefficients do not change", does that only apply to the non-integrated variables?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
monsmatglad said:
When it is said that when centering the variables, "the coefficients do not change", does that only apply to the non-integrated variables?
What do you mean by 'non-integrated variables'?
 
oops.. Was supposed to be "non-interaction"
 
In that case, yes. Consider the model
$$y_j = a_0 + a_1x_1 + a_2x_2 +a_12x_1x_2 + a_3 x_3+\epsilon_j$$
in which there is an interaction of $x_1,x_2$ but no interactions for $x_3$.
Now centring each variable we get
$$y_j = a'_0 + a'_1(x_1-\bar x_1) + a'_2(x_2-\bar x_2) +a'_{12}(x_1-\bar x_1)(x_2-\bar x_2) + a'_3 (x_3-\bar x_3)+\epsilon_j$$
Rearranging this and matching coefficients to the first equation, we get:
  • ##a_0=a'_0-a'_1\bar x_1-a'_2\bar x_2-a'_3\bar x_3 +a'_12\bar x_1\bar x_2##
  • ##a_1=a'_1 - a'_{12}\bar x_2##
  • ##a_2=a'_2 - a'_{12}\bar x_1##
  • ##a_3=a'_3## [no change]
  • ##a_{12}=a'_{12}## [no change]
So the only coefficients that remain unchanged are those of any variables with no interactions, plus those of any interaction terms.
 
I think this is just a property of linearity, which I believe is equivalent with a lack of interaction between variables, i.e., linearity "preserves translation" , but non-linear interactions do not.
 
Hello, I'm joining this forum to ask two questions which have nagged me for some time. They both are presumed obvious, yet don't make sense to me. Nobody will explain their positions, which is...uh...aka science. I also have a thread for the other question. But this one involves probability, known as the Monty Hall Problem. Please see any number of YouTube videos on this for an explanation, I'll leave it to them to explain it. I question the predicate of all those who answer this...
There is a nice little variation of the problem. The host says, after you have chosen the door, that you can change your guess, but to sweeten the deal, he says you can choose the two other doors, if you wish. This proposition is a no brainer, however before you are quick enough to accept it, the host opens one of the two doors and it is empty. In this version you really want to change your pick, but at the same time ask yourself is the host impartial and does that change anything. The host...
I'm taking a look at intuitionistic propositional logic (IPL). Basically it exclude Double Negation Elimination (DNE) from the set of axiom schemas replacing it with Ex falso quodlibet: ⊥ → p for any proposition p (including both atomic and composite propositions). In IPL, for instance, the Law of Excluded Middle (LEM) p ∨ ¬p is no longer a theorem. My question: aside from the logic formal perspective, is IPL supposed to model/address some specific "kind of world" ? Thanks.