similar to: Power analysis for MANOVA?

Hello, I've been playing with the manova() function to do some pretty straightforward multivariate analyses, and I can't for the life of me figure out how to get at the discriminant functions used. When predicting several variables simultaneously, it's important to be able to gauge how much each variable is contributing to the analysis...a simple p-value isn't really enough. I

Hi, I have a nested unbalanced data set of four correlated variables. When I do univariate analyses, my factor of interest is significant or marginally significant with all of the variables. Small effect size but always in the same direction. If I do a MANOVA instead (because the variables are not independent!) then my factor is far from being significant. How does that come about? I have

Dear all, I need to do a Manova but I have an unbalanced design. I have morphological measurements similar to the iris dataset, but I don't have the same number of measurements for all species. Does anyone know a procedure to do Manova with this kind of input in R? Thank you very much, Naiara. -------------------------------------------- Naiara S. Pinto Ecology, Evolution and Behavior 1

While I was helping a SAS-using friend with an analysis I noticed some differences in the multivariate test statistics, approximate F statistics, and p-values in the manova function using R and proc GLM using SAS. The univariate coefficients are identical. Is there a reason to expect R and SAS to give different results? Thanks, Bill Kristan.

Hi, I would like to conduct a MANOVA. I know that there 's the manova() funciton and the summary.manova() function to get the appropriate summary of test statistics. I just don't manage to specify my model in the manova() call. How to specify a model with multiple responses and one explanatory factor? If I type:

Hello, I had a couple questions about manova modeling in R. I have calculated a manova model, and generated a summary.manova output using both the Wilks test and Pillai test. The output is essentially the same, except that the Wilks lambda = 1 - Pillai. Is this normal? (The output from both is appended below.) My other question is about the use of MANOVA. If I have one variable which has a

I'm trying to learn to use manova(), and don't understand why none of the following work: > data(iris) > fit <- manova(~ Species, data=iris) Error in lm.fit(x, y, offset = offset, singular.ok = singular.ok, ...) : incompatible dimensions > fit <- manova(iris[,1:4] ~ Species, data=iris) Error in model.frame(formula, rownames, variables, varnames, extras,

Can R do a repeated measures MANOVA and tell what dimensionality the statistical variance occupies? I have been using MATLAB and SPSS to do my statistics. MATLAB can do ANOVAs and MANOVAs. When it performs a MANOVA, it returns a parameter d that estimates the dimensionality in which the means lie. It also returns a vector of p-values, where each p_n tests the null hypothesis that the mean

Hi all, I am experimenting the function "manova" in R. I tried it on a few data sets, but I did not understand the result: I used "summary(manova_result)" and "summary(manova_result, test='Wilks')" and they gave a bunch of numbers... But I need the Sum-of-Squares of BETWEEN and WITHIN matrices... How do I read off from the R's manova results? Any

Hi all, I have received the following error from summary.manova: Error in summary.manova(manova.test, test = "Pillai") : residuals have rank 36 < 64 The data is simulated data for 64 variables. The design is a 2*2 factorial with 10 replicates per treatment. Looking at the code for summary.manova, the error involves a problem with qr(). Does anyone have a suggestion as to how to

Hi, Does anyone know what the error message mean? > Boot2.Pillai <- function(x, ind) { + x <- as.matrix(x[,2:ncol(x)]) + boot.x <- as.factor(x[ind, 1]) + boot.man <- manova(x ~ boot.x) + summary(manova(boot.man))[[4]][[3]] + } > > man.res <- manova(as.matrix(pl.nosite) ~ + as.factor(plankton.new[,1]))$residuals > boot2.plank <-

Dear colleagues, I had a question wrt the car package. How do I evaluate whether a simpler multivariate regression model is adequate? For instance, I do the following: ami <- read.table(file = "http://www.public.iastate.edu/~maitra/stat501/datasets/amitriptyline.dat", col.names=c("TCAD", "drug", "gender", "antidepressant","PR",

Hi, I have problem getting the standard deviation from the manova output. I have used the manova function: myfit <- manova(cbind(y1, y2) ~ x1 + x2 + x3, data=mydata) . I tried to get the predicted values and their standard deviation by using: predict(myfit, type="response", se.fit=TRUE) But the problem is that I don't get the standard deviation values, I only

Dear R-users; Previously I posted a question about the problem of rank deficiency in summary.manova. As somebody suggested, I'm attaching a small part of the data set. #*************************************************** "test" <- structure(.Data = list(structure(.Data = c(rep(1,3),rep(2,18),rep(3,10)), levels = c("1", "2", "3"), class =

Hi there, Does anyone know how to extract elements from the table returned by Manova()? Using the univariate equivalent, Anova(), it's easy: a.an<-Anova(lm(y~x1*x2)) a.an$F This will return a vector of the F-values in order of the terms of the model. However, a similar application using Manova(): m.an<-Manova(lm(Y~x1~x2)) m.an$F Returns NULL. So does any attempt at calling the

Dear All, I am trying to perform MANOVA. I have table with 504 columns(species) and 36 rows) with two grouping (season and location) Zx <- Z[c(4:504)] Zxm <- as.matrix(Z) m<- manova(Zxm~Season*location, data=Z) when I do summary.aov, I get respond for each species but summary.manova summary.manova(m) :" residuals have rank" 24<501. What can it be the reason for this error

Hello all, I have a question on manova in R: I'm using the function "manova()" from the stats package. Is there anything like a stepwise (backward or forward) manova in R (like there is for regression and anova). When I enter: step(Model1, data=Mydata) R returns the message: Error in drop1.mlm(fit, scope$drop, scale = scale, trace = trace, k = k, : no 'drop1'

Hi.? There appears to be a bug in R function manova.? My friend and I both ran it the same way as shown below (his run) with the shown data set. His results are shown below. we both got the same results.? I was running with R 2.3.1. I'm not sure what version he used. Thanks very much, David Booth Kent State University -----Original Message----- From: dvdbooth at cs.com To: kberk at

I would like to test the hypothesis that the difference between pairs, for several variables, is zero. This is easily done separately for each variable with: lm(Y ~ rep(0, nrow(Y))) where Y is a matrix whose columns are the differences for each variable between pair members. However, I would like to get an overall probability across all variables from a Wilks or Pillai-Bartlett statistic as in

The impression I get from the list and the references I've perused is that nlme is being phased out in favor of lme4, but lme4 still doesn't have a complete feature set yet. What I'm still fuzzy on, being a relative R newbie, is: (a) what features in nlme are currently missing in lme4 (b) what's the projected time frame on getting them implemented. If anyone can answer my naive