On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 9:22 AM, Mike Dunbar <mdu at ceh.ac.uk> wrote:
(apologies - I should have written coast * MBL not ML) I'm not sure of my ground here, but surely do lose something - you wouldn't retain coast:MBL if it's not significant, as you lose degrees of freedom, and this gets worse the more terms and the more interactions you consider.
But if you drop the term you are effectively spending your degrees of freedom twice - once to estimate the effect that you drop, and then again in the new model. Another way of to see the problem is to think about the null distribution of the p-values - if you only include significant p values in your model, the standard null hypothesis is clearly not appropriate. I think there's a good discussion of this in Frank Harrell's regression modelling strategies, but unfortunately I don't have a copy on hand to point you to the exact location. Hadley