I'm sorry, no clue how I did not see that. Thank you!
On 12 February 2013 15:21, Uwe Ligges <lig...@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>wrote: > > > On 12.02.2013 15:15, Torvon wrote: > >> The code is quite long because I am running a WLS regression instead of an >> OLS regression (due to heteroscedasticity). First, I get mean structure, >> then get mean/SD relationship, then improve the variance structure by >> using >> weights proportional to 1/variance. >> >> I am quite sure this is not relevant, so I will only post the rest of the >> code. Let me know if you need that part, too. I appreciate the help Uwe! >> >> Best, >> T. >> >> >> m3 = lm(s8_1234_m~ Sex + HisDep + FamHis + ZNeuro + ZEFE + Zwh_1234_m + >> Zale_1234_m+t0s8, weights=W, data=D) >> >> >> summary(m3) >>> >> >> Call: >> lm(formula = s8_1234_m ~ Sex + HisDep + FamHis + ZNeuro + ZEFE + >> Zwh_1234_m + Zale_1234_m + t0s8, data = D, weights = W) >> >> Residuals: >> Min 1Q Median 3Q Max >> -1.3691 -0.5453 -0.4104 0.2606 7.0111 >> >> Coefficients: >> Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) >> (Intercept) 0.20961 0.01681 12.472 < 2e-16 *** >> Sex -0.02321 0.01708 -1.359 0.17435 >> HisDep 0.02544 0.01987 1.281 0.20052 >> FamHis -0.02183 0.01798 -1.215 0.22478 >> ZNeuro 0.07939 0.01007 7.882 6.87e-15 *** >> ZEFE 0.02243 0.01056 2.124 0.03385 * >> Zwh_1234_m 0.04265 0.00814 5.240 1.88e-07 *** >> Zale_1234_m 0.02877 0.00975 2.951 0.00323 ** >> t0s8 0.38980 0.06504 5.993 2.67e-09 *** >> --- >> Signif. codes: 0 *** 0.001 ** 0.01 * 0.05 . 0.1 1 >> >> Residual standard error: 0.9321 on 1280 degrees of freedom >> Multiple R-squared: 0.1282, Adjusted R-squared: 0.1228 >> F-statistic: 23.54 on 8 and 1280 DF, p-value: < 2.2e-16 >> >> coef(summary(m1))[,4] >>> >> (Intercept) Sex HisDep FamHis ZNeuro >> ZEFE Zwh_1234_m Zale_1234_m >> 3.042584e-23 2.146371e-01 2.769561e-01 9.988154e-01 5.682278e-13 >> 5.243800e-03 2.599513e-07 3.116738e-02 >> t0s8 >> 1.741608e-17 >> > > So you are comparing results from m3 with those from m1???? > > > Uwe Ligges > > > >> >> >> On 12 February 2013 15:07, Uwe Ligges >> <lig...@statistik.tu-dortmund.**de<lig...@statistik.tu-dortmund.de> >> >wrote: >> >> >>> >>> On 12.02.2013 14:44, Torvon wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Thank you, Uwe. >>>> >>>> summary(m1) gives me p-value estimates of: >>>> (Intercept) 2e-16 >>>> x1 6.9e-15 >>>> x2 1.9e-07 >>>> x3 2.7e-09 >>>> >>>> While coef(summary(m1))[,4] gives me: >>>> (Intercept) 3.0e-23 >>>> x1 5.7e-13 >>>> x2 2.6e-07 >>>> x3 1.7e-17 >>>> >>>> While the first one confirms my suspicion (-23 instead of -16), the >>>> latter one vary drastically (especially x3 from -09 to -17). Why is >>>> that? >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Can you show the complete code and output? >>> >>> Uwe Ligges >>> >>> Thank you! >>> >>>> T. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> [[alternative HTML version deleted]] >> >> >> >> ______________________________**________________ >> R-help@r-project.org mailing list >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/**listinfo/r-help<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help> >> PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/** >> posting-guide.html <http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html> >> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. >> >> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
