In the analysis of cross-classified data, the quantities of interest are frequently odds ratios. Although odds ratios are functions of the interaction parameters in association models, the usual way of normalizing and identifying these parameters means that their relationship with the odds ratios of interest is indirect. This can lead to interpretative confusions. The author points to the benefits of defining the interaction parameters of a model to have a one-to-one relationship with the odds ratios of interest, thus overcoming problems of interpretation. Three examples are presented to illustrate the argument.
Bishop, Yvonne M. M., Stephen E. Fienberg, and Paul W. Holland .1975. Discrete Multivariate Analysis: Theory and Practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2.
Breen, Richard.1983. ``Models for the Comparative Analysis of Vertical Mobility .'' Quality and Quantity19:337-52.
3.
Clogg, Clifford C.1981. ``Latent structure models of mobility.'' American Journal of Sociology86:836-68.
4.
Erikson, Robert and John H. Goldthorpe .1992. The Constant Flux: A Study of Class Mobility in Industrial Societies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
5.
Featherman, David L. and Robert M. Hauser .1978. Opportunity and Change. New York: Academic Press.
6.
Featherman, David L., Frank L. Jones, and Robert M. Hauser .1975. ``Assumptions of Mobility Research in the United States: The Case of Occupational Status.''Social Science Research4:329-60.
7.
Glass, David V., ed. 1954. Social Mobility in Britain. London: Routledge Kegan Paul.
8.
Goodman, Leo A.1972. ``Some Models for the Multiplicative Analysis of Cross-Classified Data.'' Pp. 649-696 in Proceedings of the Sixth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, edited by L. LeCarr, J. Neyman , and E. L. Scott. Berkeley: University of California Press.
9.
---. 1979. ``Simple Models for the Analysis of Association in Cross-Classifications Having Ordered Categories.'' Journal of the American Statistical Association74:537-52.
10.
---. 1981. ``Three Elementary Views of Log Linear Models for the Analysis of Cross-Classifications Having Ordered Categories. '' Sociological Methodology12:193-239.
11.
Goodman, Leo A. and Michael Hout.1998. ``Statistical Methods and Graphical Displays for Analyzing How the Association Between Two Qualitative Variables Differs Among Countries, Among Groups, or Over Time: A Modified Regression-Type Approach.''Sociological Methodology28:175-230.
12.
Hauser, Robert M.1978. ``A Structural Model of the Mobility Table.''Social Forces56:919-53.
13.
Holt, David.1979. ``Log-Linear Models for Contingency Table Analysis: On the Interpretation of Parameters.'' Sociological Methods & Research7:330-6.
14.
Hout, Michael, Otis Dudley Duncan, and Michael E. Sobel .1987. ``Association and Heterogeneity: Structural Models of Similarities and Differences.''Sociological Methodology17:145-84.
15.
Lang, Joseph B. and Alan Agresti.1994. ``Simultaneously Modeling Joint and Marginal Distributions of Multivariate Categorical Responses.''Journal of the American Statistical Association89:625-32.
16.
Lang, Joseph B. and Scott R. Eliason .1997. ``The Application of Association-Marginal Models to the Study of Social Mobility.''Sociological Methods & Research26:183-213.
17.
MacDonald, Kenneth I.1981. ``On the Formulation of a Structural Model of the Mobility Table.''Social Forces60:557-71.
18.
Page, W.F.1977. ``Interpretation of Goodman's Log-Linear Models Effects: An Odds Ratio Approach.'' Sociological Methods & Research5:419-35.
19.
Sobel, Michael E., Mark P. Becker, and Susan P. Minick .1998. ``Origins, Destinations, and Association in Occupational Mobility.''American Journal of Sociology104:687-721.
20.
Svalastoga, Kaare.1959. Prestige, Class and Mobility. London : Heinemann.
21.
Xie, Yue.1992. ``The Log-Multiplicative Layer Effect Model for Comparing Mobility Tables.'' American Sociological Review57:380-95.
