|
⇤ ← Revision 1 as of 2016-07-28 08:55:08
Size: 792
Comment:
|
← Revision 2 as of 2016-07-28 08:55:20 ⇥
Size: 791
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 1: | Line 1: |
| Line 4: | Line 3: |
| (The below is taken from http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/27682/what-is-the-reason-why-we-use-natural-logarithm-ln-rather-than-log-to-base-10) | (The below is taken from http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/27682/what-is-the-reason-why-we-use-natural-logarithm-ln-rather-than-log-to-base-10): |
Use of natural logs in data transformations
(The below is taken from http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/27682/what-is-the-reason-why-we-use-natural-logarithm-ln-rather-than-log-to-base-10):
In the context of linear regression in the social sciences, Gelman and Hill write[1]:
We prefer natural logs (that is, logarithms base e e) because, as described above, coefficients on the natural-log scale are directly interpretable as approximate proportional differences: with a coefficient of 0.06, a difference of 1 in x corresponds to an approximate 6% difference in y, and so forth.
Reference
[1] Andrew Gelman and Jennifer Hill (2007). Data Analysis using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge; New York, pp. 60-61.