Re: [R] explalinig the output of my linear model analysis

2009-10-27 Thread Tal Galili
I second Rolf. On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Rolf Turner wrote: > > On 27/10/2009, at 7:58 PM, Peter Ehlers wrote: > > ... if one doesn't understand the output of lm(), then one's >> >> knowledge of statistics is insufficient to warrant using lm(). >> > > I nominate this as a fortune. > >

Re: [R] explalinig the output of my linear model analysis

2009-10-27 Thread Kingsford Jones
...which would complement the apropos fortune from John Fox: > library(fortunes) > fortune('dangerous') If you give people a linear model function you give them something dangerous. -- John Fox useR! 2004, Vienna (May 2004) On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Rolf Turner wrote: > > On

Re: [R] explalinig the output of my linear model analysis

2009-10-27 Thread Rolf Turner
On 27/10/2009, at 7:58 PM, Peter Ehlers wrote: ... if one doesn't understand the output of lm(), then one's knowledge of statistics is insufficient to warrant using lm(). I nominate this as a fortune. cheers, Rolf Turner ###

Re: [R] explalinig the output of my linear model analysis

2009-10-26 Thread Peter Ehlers
Ista, Here's the quote from MASS (the book, 4e, p.142): "Terms of the form a/x, where a is a factor, are best thought of as "separate regression models of type 1 + x within the levels of a." I'm not answering the OP's question because in my view if one doesn't understand the output of lm(), then

Re: [R] explalinig the output of my linear model analysis

2009-10-26 Thread Ista Zahn
I've never seen the "/" used in a formula like that. What does it do? -Ista On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 8:13 AM, john56 wrote: > > Hi, > > I am new in statistics and i manage to make the linear model analysis but i > have some difficulties in explaining the results. Can someone help me > explalinig