Table 4 Fractional logistic regression models for the median scores across by category
| Â | (1) Dispensary Supplement (0-100%) | (2) Business Plan (0-100%) | (3) Security (0-100%) | (4) Economic Impact (0-100%) | (5) Character (0-100%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Independent variables | Marginal Effect [95% C.I.] | Marginal Effect [95% C.I.] | Marginal Effect [95% C.I.] | Marginal Effect [95% C.I.] | Marginal Effect [95% C.I.] |
Continuous variables | Semi-elasticity coefficients: (ΔScore)/(%ΔX) | ||||
Population density (in thousands) | 0.011* [0.003, 0.020] | 0.012** [0.004, 0.019] | 0.010* [0.001, 0.020] | 0.009 [–0.002, 0.021] | 0.002 [–0.002, 0.006] |
Age dependency ratio x 100 | 0.005 [–0.021, 0.030] | –0.007 [–0.032, 0.017] | –0.007 [–0.037, 0.024] | 0.005 [–0.028, 0.039] | 0.004 [–0.009, 0.017] |
Socioeconomic vulnerability index | –0.018 [–0.038, 0.002] | –0.010 [–0.027, 0.007] | –0.010 [–0.032, 0.013] | –0.015 [–0.038, 0.008] | –0.003 [–0.012, 0.006] |
% Retail industry employment | 0.002 [– 0.017, 0.021] | 0.002 [–0.017, 0.020] | 0.003 [–0.019, 0.025] | 0.007 [–0.016, 0.029] | 0.002 [–0.007, 0.011] |
Binary variables | Level-level effects: ΔPr(Y = 1)/(ΔX) | ||||
Black or Hispanic majority (0,1) | 0.022 [–0.003, 0.048] | 0.007 [–0.019, 0.032] | –0.009 [–0.041, 0.024] | 0.010 [–0.029, 0.049] | –0.005 [–0.018, 0.009] |
No racial or ethnic majority (0, 1) | 0.026* [0.004, 0.048] | 0.035** [0.012, 0.059] | 0.034 [–0.006, 0.075] | 0.053** [0.015, 0.090] | 0.006 [–0.009, 0.020] |
K-12 public school (0,1) | –0.001 [–0.018, 0.017] | –0.005 [–0.020, 0.010] | –0.004 [–0.024, 0.017] | 0.000 [–0.021, 0.021] | –0.003 [–0.011, 0.005] |
Wald χ2 | 18.59** | 27.42** | 11.39 | 13.56 | 4.38 |
p-value (Prob. > χ2) | 0.010 | 0.000 | 0.122 | 0.060 | 0.735 |
Sample size | 606 | 606 | 606 | 606 | 606 |