single argument anova for GLMMs not yet implemented
I also like the explanation of quasi-likelihood vs. glmm, but I can say from an ecological perspective I frequently encounter situations in which I have included all the random effects of blocks, plots, times etc, and still have massive amounts of overdispersion. A student in my Ecological Statistics class examined repeated counts of grasshoppers in plots that have or have not received nitrogen addition. A poisson family glmm gives a nice account of the effects of total veg biomass, date, and nitrogen addition, but the residual deviance is > 1700 for a sample size of about 400. I would love to be able to fit a negative binomial model in that case; I typically resort to using WinBUGS and MCMC to do this, but that is beyond what I can get my students to do in a one semester course. I have encountered situations in which even using a negative binomial model (for counts) or beta-binomial type model ( for proportion of success data) are insufficient to explain the variability in ecological situations. In these cases I usually have reason to believe that there is a discrete mixture going on - ie the observations are coming from two or more distinct populations which have not been distinguished by anything the observer can record, or thought to record (immune status for parasite hosts, for example). I have tried quasi- family models in those cases, but always felt a little uncomfortable drawing much in the way of inference. I understand likelihood! Anyway, I appreciate the tool. It is very nice and continues to get better! Thanks, Drew Tyre School of Natural Resources University of Nebraska-Lincoln 416 Hardin Hall, East Campus 3310 Holdrege Street Lincoln, NE 68583-0974 phone: +1 402 472 4054 fax: +1 402 472 2946 email: atyre2 at unl.edu http://snr.unl.edu/tyre "Douglas Bates" <bates at stat.wisc.edu> Sent by: r-sig-mixed-models-bounces at r-project.org 12/11/2008 03:00 PM To "Andrew Robinson" <A.Robinson at ms.unimelb.edu.au> cc R Mixed Models <r-sig-mixed-models at r-project.org>, Murray Jorgensen <maj at stats.waikato.ac.nz> Subject Re: [R-sig-ME] single argument anova for GLMMs not yet implemented On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Andrew Robinson
<A.Robinson at ms.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
Echoing Murray's points here - nicely put, Murray - it seems to me that the quasi-likelihood and the GLMM are different approaches to the same problem.
I agree and I also appreciate Murray's elegant explanation.
Can anyone provide a substantial example where random effects and quasilikelihood have both been necessary?
I'm kind of waiting for Ben Bolker to let us know how things look from his perspective. I seem to remember that Ben and others in ecological fields were concerned about overdispersion, even after incorporating random effects.
Best wishes, Andrew On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 09:11:39AM +1300, Murray Jorgensen wrote:
The following is how I think about this at the moment: The quasi-likelihood approach is an attempt at a model-free approach to the problem of overdispersion in non-Gaussian regression situations where standard distributional assumptions fail to provide the observed mean-variance relationship. The glmm approach, on the other hand, does not abandon models and likelihood but seeks to account for the observed mean-variance relationship by adding unobserved latent variables (random effects) to the model. Seeking to combine the two approaches by using both quasilikelihood *and* random effects would seem to be asking for trouble as being able to use two tools on one problem would give a lot of flexibility to the parameter estimation; probably leading to a very flat quasilikelihood surface and ill-determined optima. But all of the above is only thoughts without the benefit of either serious attempts at fitting real data or doing serious theory so I will defer to anyone who has done either! Philosophically, at least, there seems to be clash between the two approaches and I doubt that attempts to combine them will be
successful.
Murray Jorgensen
-- Andrew Robinson Department of Mathematics and Statistics Tel: +61-3-8344-6410 University of Melbourne, VIC 3010 Australia Fax: +61-3-8344-4599 http://www.ms.unimelb.edu.au/~andrewpr http://blogs.mbs.edu/fishing-in-the-bay/
_______________________________________________ R-sig-mixed-models at r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models