Re: [R] Standard errors GLM

You have a conceptual problem, as pointed out by previous helpers. You don't have a standard error for the first level of your categorical variable because that level's effect is not estimated. It is being used as a reference level against which the other levels of that categorical variable are b

Re: [R] Standard errors GLM

On Mar 13, 2012, at 9:38 AM, D_Tomas wrote: Dear userRs, when applied the summary function to a glm fit (e.g Poisson) the parameter table provides the categorical variables assuming that the first level estimate (in alphabetical order) is 0. Not really. It returns an estimate for the cont

Re: [R] Standard errors GLM

Hi, See inline. On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 6:38 AM, D_Tomas wrote: > Dear userRs, > > when applied the summary function to a glm fit (e.g Poisson) the parameter > table provides the categorical variables assuming that the first level > estimate (in alphabetical order) is 0. > > What is the standard