similar to: extracting dispersion parameter from quasipoisson lmer model

Dear all, I am currently analyzing count data from a hierarchical design, and I?ve tried to follow the suggestions for a correct estimation of p-values as discusssed at R-Wiki (http://wiki.r-project.org/rwiki/doku.php?id=guides:lmer-tests&s=lme%20and%20aov). However, I have the problem that my model only consists of parameters with just 1 d.f. (intercepts, slopes), so that the

Dear R users, I am having problems trying to fit quasipoisson and negative binomials glm. My data set contains abundance (counts) of a species under different management regimens. First, I tried to fit a poisson glm: > summary(model.p<-glm(abund~mgmtcat,poisson)) Call: glm(formula = abund ~ mgmtcat, family = poisson) . . . (Dispersion parameter

R 2.7 Windows XP I have two model that have been run using exactly the same data, both fit using glm(). One model is a linear regression (gaussian(link = "identity")) the other a quasipoisson(link = "log"). I have log likelihoods from each model. Is there any way I can determine which model is a better fit to the data? anova() does not appear to work as the models have the

Hi list, can anybody point me to the trick how glm is computing the dispersion parameter in quasi-poisson regression, eg. glm(...,family="quasipoisson")? Thanks &regards, Sven

Hello, I have a question about modelling via glm. I have a dataset (see dput) that looks like as if it where poisson distributed (actually I would appreciate that) but it isnt because mean unequals var. > mean (x) [1] 901.7827 > var (x) [1] 132439.3 Anyway, I tried to model it via poisson and quasipoisson. Actually, just to get an impression how glm works. But I dont know how to

Hello, I'm having an error when trying to fit the next GLM: >>model<-glm(response ~ CLONE_M + CLONE_F + HATCHING +(CLONE_M*CLONE_F) + (CLONE_M*HATCHING) + (CLONE_F*HATCHING) + (CLONE_M*CLONE_F*HATCHING), family=quasipoisson) >> anova(model, test="Chi") >Error in if (dispersion == 1) Inf else object$df.residual : missing value where TRUE/FALSE needed If I fit

Hello all: I frequently have glm models in which the residual variance is much lower than the residual degrees of freedom (e.g. Res.Dev=30.5, Res.DF = 82). Is it appropriate for me to use a quasipoisson error distribution and test it with an F distribution? It seems to me that I could stand to gain a much-reduced standard error if I let the procedure estimate my dispersion factor (which

Dear all, I am analyzing counts of seabirds made from line transects at sea. I have been fitting Poisson and negative binomial distributions to the data using the goodfit function from the vcd library. I would also like to evaluate how well a quasi-poisson distribution fits the data. However, none of the potentially suitable functions I have identified (goodfit(vcd), fitdistr(MASS),

I am running 9 negative binomial regressions with count data. The nine models use 9 different dependent variables - items of a clinical screening instrument - and use the same set of 5 predictors. Goal is to find out whether these predictors have differential effects on the items. Due to various reasons, one being that I want to avoid overfitting models, I need to employ identical types of

Sorry about re-posting this, it never went out to the mailing list when I posted this to r-help forum on Nabble and was pending for a few days, now that I am subscribe to the mailing list I hope that this goes out: I've been a viewer of this forum for a while and it has helped out a lot, but this is my first time posting something. I am running glm models for richness and abundances. For

(To the list moderator: I just subscribed to the list. Apologies for not having done so longer before trying to post.) Hi all, I am currently using lmer to analyze data from an experiment with a single fixed factor (treatment, 6 levels) and a single random factor (block). I've been trying to follow the online guidance for estimating p-values for parameter estimates on these and other

Dear R users I am trying to obtain p-values for (quasi)poisson lmer models, including Markov-chain Monte Carlo sampling and the command summary. > > My problems is that p values derived from both these methods are totally different. My question is (1) there a bug in my code and > (2) How can I proceed, left with these uncertainties in the estimations of > the p-values? > > Below

Dear R-helpers, this mail is intended to mention a rather trange result and generate potential useful comments on it. I am not aware of another posts on this issue ( RSiteSearch("quasipoisson lmer version dispersion")). MUsing the exemple in the reference of the lmer function (in lme4 library) and turning it into a quasi-poisson or quasi-binomial analysis, we get different results,

Hi all, I was wondering if somebody could give me advice regarding the dispersion parameter in GLMM's. I'm a beginner in R and basically in GLMM's. I've ran a GLMM with a poisson family and got really nice results that conform with theory, as well with results that I've obtained previously with other analysis and that others have obtained in similar studies. But the

Dear R users, I would like to fit a glm with Poisson distribution and log link with a known dispersion parameter. I do not want to estimate the dispersion parameter. I know what it is, so I simply want to fix it at a constant for this and other models to follow. My simple, no covariate model is: Tall.glm<-glm(Seedling~1, family=poisson, offset(log(area)), data=tallPSME.df) I want to

Dear R users, I have now tried out several options of obtaining p-values for (quasi)poisson lmer models, including Markov-chain Monte Carlo sampling and single-term deletions with subsequent chi-square tests (although I am aware that the latter may be problematic). However, I encountered several problems that can be classified as (1) the quasipoisson lmer model does not give p-values when

glm(S ~ -1 + Mdif, family=quasipoisson(link=identity), start=strt, sdat) gives error: > Error in glm.fit(x = X, y = Y, weights = weights, start = start, etastart > = > etastart, : > cannot find valid starting values: please specify some strt is set to be the coefficient for a similar fit glm(S ~ -1 + I(Mdif + 1),... i.e. (Mdif + 1) is a vector similar to Mdif. The error

I contacted John Fox about this first, because parts of the file are attributed to him. He says that he didn't write rstandard.glm(), and suggests asking r-devel. As it stands, rstandard.glm() has summary(model)$dispersion outside the sqrt(), while in rstandard.lm(), the sd is already sqrt()ed. This seems to follow stdres() in VR/MASS/R/stdres.R. Of course for the c("poisson",

I am trying to do a quasipoisson regression to know if the frequency of drinking of my subject is related to temperature. The problem is that I'm not sure how to interpret my result. 1) Since my result is signifiant, can I tell that the frequency of drinking of my subject increase linearly or exponentially? 2) When I want to quantify the increase, do I need to do an exponential

> Hello, > > I have a question about a discrepancy between the > reported F statistics using anova() and add1() from > adding an additional term to form nested models. > > I found and old posting related to anova() and > drop1() regarding a glm with a dispersion parameter. > > The posting is very old (May 2000, R 1.1.0). > The old posting is located here. >