You said it right in your first letter. You want to keep it at a
level that is comprehensible. Not just to you, but your colleagues,
reviewers, readers...
Remember the sage wisdom that all models are wrong, but some of them
are useful.
Rather than try to forge the Excalibur of statistical
Thank you Mitchell,
I will try that. So I presume that the initial paper where they showed the
estimates AND the intercept from a model averaging procedure may have been
done using a different method?
Would it still be prudent to use a global model and then perhaps show the
top so many, perhaps
Hello all,
If someone could take a little time to help me then I would be very
grateful.
I studied piping plovers last summer. I watched each chick within a brood
for 5 minutes and recorded behaviour, habitat use and foraging rate.
There were two Sites, the first with 4 broods and the second with
You've got to be kidding!
You are requesting extensive statistical consulting from the R-Help
list. That is not the purpose of this list, nor is it reasonable to
expect remote statisticians unfamiliar with your work or state of
understanding (which appears to be rather sketchy) to provide
... perhaps also worth mentioning:
The combination of some data and an aching desire for an answer does
not ensure that a reasonable answer can be extracted from a given body
of data.
-- John Tukey
-- Bert
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Dragonwalker
dragonwalker...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hello
I understand where you are coming from, but the issue is that some
exploration of the data through graphs and the like, showed that patterns
could be seen. However with only 7 means it is extremely difficult to get
any kind of statistical evidence and as some mean values are the same some
of the
6 matches
Mail list logo
