Dear Victor,
this is a really difficult problem to intepret, let alone diagnose.
Please provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code
that will allow us to see what the problem is.
Cheers
Andrew
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 09:33:31AM +0100, victor wrote:
Dear all,
I've got a
As Andrew noted, you need to provide more information. But, what I see
is that your model assumes X is continuous but you say it is bounded,
-25 X 0
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of victor
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 3:34 AM
It is boundend, you're right. In fact it is -25=X=0
These are cross-national survey data (I was investigated 7 countries in
each country there was 900-1700 cases).
In fact, there was two level 2 variables, so:
m1-lme(X~Y,~1|group,data=data,na.action=na.exclude,method=ML)
victor wrote:
It is boundend, you're right. In fact it is -25=X=0
These are cross-national survey data (I was investigated 7 countries in
each country there was 900-1700 cases).
In fact, there was two level 2 variables, so:
m1-lme(X~Y,~1|group,data=data,na.action=na.exclude,method=ML)
, December 06, 2006 12:07 PM
To: Doran, Harold
Cc: r-help@stat.math.ethz.ch
Subject: Re: [R] intercept value in lme
It is boundend, you're right. In fact it is -25=X=0
These are cross-national survey data (I was investigated 7
countries in each country there was 900-1700 cases).
In fact
Hello Victor,
I'm afraid that this still isn't what we're looking for, in terms of
reproducible code, but we can guess. What is the range of the
Z1 and Z2 variables? What is the range of the model predictions?
If the Z1 and Z2 variables are large and positive then they will be
compensating.
Thanks to all of you!
Yes, you're right - I didn't take into consideration the ranges of
predicors which are quite large. I think the matter over and realize
that my assumption that something have to be wrong doesn't have in fact
any reason except strange look of the value.
Centering helped (as
