interesting but ... 3 questions:
1. how can the r squared for the best model be 100% when, the errors are
not all 0s?
2. we are talking about a model that goes from an r squared of 99.5% ... to
(nearly) 100% ... is this important?
3. while there is a dinky gain in r squared ... it comes in relation to
using a scale that is not as understandable as age ... it is the square of
age ... or the cube of age ... is this gain worth the transposition of a
scale in 1 year increments ... to something like squares or cubes of age
increments?
i would say that in this case ... using a much more complicated model ...
does not add to the clarity of the prediction problem ... but, that is just
my opinion
At 07:14 PM 6/30/00 -0400, Bob Hayden wrote:
>
>Tom Moore asked...
>
>----- Forwarded message from Thomas L. Moore -----
==============================================================
dennis roberts, penn state university
educational psychology, 8148632401
http://roberts.ed.psu.edu/users/droberts/droberts.htm
===========================================================================
This list is open to everyone. Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages. Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.
For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===========================================================================
