Skip to content

p values of lmer

4 messages · meng, Rune Haubo, R. Michael Weylandt +1 more

#
Try

library(lmerTest)
fm1 <- lmer(Reaction ~ Days + (Days|Subject), sleepstudy)
summary(fm1)

Linear mixed model fit by REML
Formula: Reaction ~ Days + (Days | Subject)
   Data: sleepstudy
  AIC  BIC logLik deviance REMLdev
 1756 1775 -871.8     1752    1744
Random effects:
 Groups   Name        Variance Std.Dev. Corr
 Subject  (Intercept) 612.092  24.7405
          Days         35.072   5.9221  0.066
 Residual             654.941  25.5918
Number of obs: 180, groups: Subject, 18

Fixed effects:
            Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
(Intercept)  251.405      6.825   36.84  < 2e-16 ***
Days          10.467      1.546    6.77 3.27e-06 ***
---
Signif. codes:  0 ?***? 0.001 ?**? 0.01 ?*? 0.05 ?.? 0.1 ? ? 1

Correlation of Fixed Effects:
     (Intr)
Days -0.138

Cheers,
Rune
On 19 June 2013 11:27, meng <laomeng_3 at 163.com> wrote:
#
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:27 AM, meng <laomeng_3 at 163.com> wrote:
Take a look at R FAQ 7.35.

http://cran.r-project.org/doc/FAQ/R-FAQ.html#Why-are-p_002dvalues-not-displayed-when-using-lmer_0028_0029_003f
1 day later
#
On Jun 19, 2013, at 15:02 , R. Michael Weylandt wrote:

            
That's getting a bit old. It has a reference to Doug Bates posting from 2006, which basically says "because degree of freedom issues are unresolved". 

Important developments have happened since, and Rune's reference to package lmerTest (and, implicitly, pbkrtest) is more precise these days.