Message-ID: <CAFCA911-9EB1-4205-886F-AA8A59048F7A@kjbeath.com.au>
Date: 2008-08-24T07:30:46Z
From: Ken Beath
Subject: binomial fixed-effect p-values by simulation
In-Reply-To: <a46630750808230916h676ba0aeh2b4febd0542a3568@mail.gmail.com>
On 24/08/2008, at 2:16 AM, Daniel Ezra Johnson wrote:
> What would be the difference between simulating the z-statistic (if
> I'm getting this, it would be determining what proportion of the
> simulations have a z-statistic as large as the one from the observed
> data) versus doing the same thing with the difference of
> log-likelihoods)?
>
> One difference I see is that with the z-statistic approach there is no
> need to fit a null model, only the alternative model (to data
> generated by the null model)?
>
> D
>
They should produce similar results and which is better is probably of
theoretical rather than practical interest.
I will try this with a commercial program I have that does both.
Ken