5

There are multiple reasons for applying standardisation/mean centre for predictors before putting them into a regression model. However, in the literature, some people do not do so or even argue against this idea. They say that it is not necessary to do standardisation/mean centre. Actually what are their reasons? I heard that standardisation/mean centre changes the interpretation of main effect, but not the interaction effect. Is it true? Are there any drawbacks to standardisation/mean centre before applying the predictors into a regression model?

The links below are some previous discussions on the benefits of standardisation/mean centre. But in order to be as critical as possible, I'd like to know the backside of standardisation/mean centre.

JetLag
  • 1,105
  • 2
  • 9
  • 22
  • 1
    One disadvantage is that you lose the original scaling. That might be important when you read the estimated coefficients. – SmallChess Oct 30 '17 at 05:03
  • @SmallChess, true, but standardization is normally undone after the estimation, so the coefficients for the original variables are obtained. – Richard Hardy Oct 30 '17 at 06:22
  • The major benefits and drawbacks of any linear transform will often come down to interpretability, I think, and the downside comes when people are not able to properly interpret a standard deviation. I don’t think it’s necessarily ever *wrong* to do so - it just isn’t necessary and is often more cosmetic. (Not to downplay the importance of clear reporting.) – RickyB Nov 08 '17 at 13:47

0 Answers0