Serguei Kaniovski
2007-Feb-27 13:36 UTC
[R] How to put the dependent variable in GLM proportion model
Hello everyone, I am confused about how the dependent variable should be specified, e.g. say S and F denote series of successes and failures. Is it share<-S/(S+F) glm(share~x,family=quasibinomial) or glm(cbind(S,F)~x,family=quasibinomial) The two variants produce very different dispersion parameter and deviances. The book by Crawley, the only one R-book a have, says the second variant is correct for proportions data. Serguei [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
Greg Snow
2007-Feb-27 21:06 UTC
[R] How to put the dependent variable in GLM proportion model
-- Gregory (Greg) L. Snow Ph.D. Statistical Data Center Intermountain Healthcare greg.snow at intermountainmail.org (801) 408-8111 The first one should be:> n <- (S+F) > share <- S/(S+F) > glm(share~x, family=quasibinomial, weights=n)This should give you results more comparable to the second one. Either way is acceptable. Hope this helps,> -----Original Message----- > From: r-help-bounces at stat.math.ethz.ch > [mailto:r-help-bounces at stat.math.ethz.ch] On Behalf Of > Serguei Kaniovski > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 6:37 AM > To: r-help at stat.math.ethz.ch > Subject: [R] How to put the dependent variable in GLM proportion model > > > Hello everyone, > > I am confused about how the dependent variable should be > specified, e.g. > say S and F denote series of successes and failures. Is it > > share<-S/(S+F) > glm(share~x,family=quasibinomial) > > or > > glm(cbind(S,F)~x,family=quasibinomial) > > The two variants produce very different dispersion parameter > and deviances. > The book by Crawley, the only one R-book a have, says the > second variant is correct for proportions data. > > Serguei > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > > ______________________________________________ > R-help at stat.math.ethz.ch 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. >