Re: [R-sig-phylo] Odd behavior of phylogenetic regressions

e@wisc.edu>> Sendt: 3. september 2019 01:04 Til: r-sig-phylo@r-project.org<mailto:r-sig-phylo@r-project.org> mailto:r-sig-phylo@r-project.org>>; Søren Faurby mailto:soren.fau...@bios.au.dk>> Emne: Re: [R-sig-phylo] Odd behavior of phylogenetic regressions I suspect t

Re: [R-sig-phylo] Odd behavior of phylogenetic regressions

nelli-lab.net/> Fra: Cecile Ane Sendt: 3. september 2019 01:04 Til: r-sig-phylo@r-project.org ; Søren Faurby Emne: Re: [R-sig-phylo] Odd behavior of phylogenetic regressions I suspect that “Climbing” and “Rainforest” are correlated with each other, so one of both lose significance when b

Re: [R-sig-phylo] Odd behavior of phylogenetic regressions

I suspect that “Climbing” and “Rainforest” are correlated with each other, so one of both lose significance when both are included in the model. Also, the Wald-type tests in logistic regression are not exact, and they typically give a different p-value than a likelihood ratio test. Both Wald