anova (lm, lmer ) question
If I understood, the following should have worked?
m.ML <- lmer(
+ log10(TWA) ~ ns(Wind.Speed,3) + isLamar + isLime1p + isLime5p + log10(TWAuw) + + (1|BiosolidSource) + (1|sample) + (1|sample.trial), + REML=F, + data=da.regr + )
m.lm <- lm(
+ log10(TWA) ~ ns(Wind.Speed,3) + isLamar + isLime1p + isLime5p + log10(TWAuw), + data=da.regr + )
anova(m.ML, m.lm)
Error in UseMethod("isREML") :
no applicable method for 'isREML' applied to an object of class "lm"
-----Original Message-----
From: r-sig-mixed-models-bounces at r-project.org [mailto:r-sig-mixed-models-bounces at r-project.org] On Behalf Of Ben Pelzer
Sent: Saturday, October 04, 2014 10:13 AM
To: r-sig-mixed-models at r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R-sig-ME] anova (lm, lmer ) question
Dear romunov, Ben and Ken,
Thanks for your replies. From these I conclude that:
- for linear (lmer vs. lm) models there's no problem in using the deviance difference
- for generalized linear models (glmer vs. glm) it's ok to use the deviance difference as long as nAGQ=1.
Would you agree with me? Best regards,
Ben.
On 4-10-2014 2:48, Ben Bolker wrote:
Thanks for checking. The comparison with Stata isn't necessarily relevant though -- or question is whether `lm` and `lmer` (or `glm` and `glmer`) include/exclude the same additive constants, so that their log-likelihoods are directly comparable. On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Ken Beath <ken.beath at mq.edu.au> wrote:
nAGQ=1 and greater than 1 give different results, and the nAGQ=1 matches fairly closely the log likelihood from Stata for 3 quadrature points, so presumably is correct. Stata's Laplace didn't converge with my data. Ken On 4 October 2014 09:06, Ben Bolker <bbolker at gmail.com> wrote:
romunov <romunov at ...> writes:
FWIW, this is from the glmm faq site <http://glmm.wikidot.com/faq>. How can I test whether a random effect is significant?
...
- *do not* compare lmer models with the corresponding lm fits, or
glmer/glm; the log-likelihoods are not commensurate (i.e., they
include
different additive terms)
For what it's worth, I believe this is out of date, _except_ for glmer fits with nAGQ>1. It should be possible to implement anova(<merMod>,<lm>/<glm>) -- it's only a nuisance (sadly, if we were still using S4 classes at this level it would be easier ...) Ben Bolker
_______________________________________________ R-sig-mixed-models at r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models
-- *Ken Beath* Lecturer Statistics Department MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY NSW 2109, Australia Phone: +61 (0)2 9850 8516 Building E4A, room 526 http://stat.mq.edu.au/our_staff/staff_-_alphabetical/staff/beath,_ken / CRICOS Provider No 00002J This message is intended for the addressee named and m...{{dropped:11}}
_______________________________________________ R-sig-mixed-models at r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models
_______________________________________________ R-sig-mixed-models at r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models