{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mberneaud/FinalProject/issues/1","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mberneaud/FinalProject","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mberneaud/FinalProject/issues/1/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mberneaud/FinalProject/issues/1/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mberneaud/FinalProject/issues/1/events","html_url":"https://github.com/mberneaud/FinalProject/issues/1","id":153995347,"number":1,"title":"R Code: Excluding retired mayors","user":{"login":"jmarkgraf","id":17107907,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/17107907?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/jmarkgraf","html_url":"https://github.com/jmarkgraf","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jmarkgraf/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jmarkgraf/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jmarkgraf/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jmarkgraf/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jmarkgraf/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jmarkgraf/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jmarkgraf/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jmarkgraf/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jmarkgraf/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":13,"created_at":"2016-05-10T12:34:50Z","updated_at":"2016-05-12T08:25:37Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Hi Malte,\r\n\r\nso far I used a rather blunt coding to exclude retired mayors:\r\n```\r\n##: retirement dummy\r\nMayorElection <- slide(MayorElection, Var = \"NameCandidate1\", \r\n                       GroupVar = \"IDMunicipality\",\r\n                       NewVar = \"L.NameCandidate1\")\r\nMayorElection$Retired <- 1\r\nMayorElection$Retired[MayorElection$NameCandidate1 == \r\n                        MayorElection$L.NameCandidate1] <- 0\r\nMayorElection$Retired[MayorElection$NameCandidate2 == \r\n                        MayorElection$L.NameCandidate1] <- 0\r\nMayorElection$Retired[MayorElection$NameCandidate3 == \r\n                        MayorElection$L.NameCandidate1] <- 0\r\nMayorElection$Retired[MayorElection$NameCandidate4 == \r\n                        MayorElection$L.NameCandidate1] <- 0\r\n```\r\n\r\nTo make it really effective, you would indeed need to get rid of the \"Dr\" titles for all candidate columns. For the moment, it however did the job (although not perfectly). You should find a very strong re-election rate afterwards and a non-significant board-membership dummy. This is at least what I found!"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mberneaud/FinalProject/issues/comments/218691892","html_url":"https://github.com/mberneaud/FinalProject/issues/1#issuecomment-218691892","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mberneaud/FinalProject/issues/1","id":218691892,"user":{"login":"mberneaud","id":15064942,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/15064942?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/mberneaud","html_url":"https://github.com/mberneaud","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mberneaud/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mberneaud/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mberneaud/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mberneaud/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mberneaud/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mberneaud/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mberneaud/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mberneaud/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mberneaud/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2016-05-12T08:25:37Z","updated_at":"2016-05-12T08:25:37Z","body":"Yeah, I decided to include both sets of regression models into the analysis now, just to get an understanding of the bias we might incur by not controlling for retired mayors, but I made clear that the results are highly suspect. \r\n\r\nI'll include your reasoning as to why losing mayors might not actually be underrepresented into my argument, as it can only strengthen the case of controlling for retired mayors. \r\n\r\n![model1](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/15064942/15208305/1dcaa5d8-182b-11e6-84d3-291852257562.png)\r\n\r\nThe above are the results while accounting for mayors who most likely retired. Unfortunately, none of the effects come out to be statistically significant, except for the previous vote share. However, given the small sample size and the small size of the estimated effect of board membership, it is not unlikely to not find any significant effects at this stage. Moreover, there is a strong indication of an incumbency advantage as captured by the previous vote share, which seems more credible than no effect at all. \r\n\r\nOverall, I the model included in this post is a lot more credible and forms the basis for my conclusion, but it is a bit disappointing nevertheless. "}}