Skip to content
Prev 17417 / 398513 Next

Wilcoxon versus glm

On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Dominik Grathwohl wrote:

            
Exactly
and so it was. It was nearly 10
Well, there's a number of issues here

1/ There's no necessary reason why these two tests should agree as they
have different null hypotheses.  The Wilcoxon tests P(y1>y0)=1/2, the glm
compares two weighted means.

2/ The Wald tests done by glm() can perform badly when the difference
between the groups is very large as it is here. A coefficient of 9.87 is
infinite for practical purposes (remember it is a ratio of e^9.87, about
20000, in the means), so you were probably unlucky enough to get all zeros
in y0.  The MLE is then infinite.

If you used
	anova(glm.M1)
you would get a likelihood ratio test, which would behave better.


	-thomas

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._