Home » Topics » Wealth Index » Comparative Wealth Index
|
|
|
|
Re: Comparative Wealth Index [message #8890 is a reply to message #8876] |
Tue, 12 January 2016 01:56   |
Liz-DHS
Messages: 1516 Registered: February 2013
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear User,
Here is a response from Dr. Shea Rutstein:
Quote:The CWI is used to compare across surveys. There is no need to use it to compare regions. Since the transformation is constant within a survey, no difference in the concentration index should be observed (to the level of rounding).
If this does not answer your question, please post again.
[Updated on: Tue, 12 January 2016 11:13] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Comparative Wealth Index [message #8921 is a reply to message #8910] |
Thu, 14 January 2016 15:47   |
Liz-DHS
Messages: 1516 Registered: February 2013
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear User,
A response from Dr. Shea Rutstein,
Quote:Since the DHS Wealth Index has a mean of zero by construction, applying the constant would give a mean of -0.932 for the CWI, not zero! The beta term just expands or reduces the dispersion (equally) so it doesn't change the mean. Has the user reversed the coefficients? Has s/he applied weights (should not for evaluating the mean)? Subset the data?
[Updated on: Mon, 25 January 2016 13:35] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 1 04:50:06 Coordinated Universal Time 2025
|