Re: [R] defining "id" argument in geeglm

ble occurrences of butterfly species do not behave independently.) > > > On Mon, 29 Aug 2011, Anna Mill wrote: > > Hi all, >> >> I am trying to do a generalized estimating equation (GEE) with the >> "geepack" >> package and I am not 100% sure what ex

[R] defining "id" argument in geeglm

Hi all, I am trying to do a generalized estimating equation (GEE) with the "geepack" package and I am not 100% sure what exactly the "id" argument means. It seems to be an important argument because results differ considerably defining different clusters. I have a data set of counts (poisson dist

Re: [R] glm with binomial errors - problem with overdispersion

> Also note that success+failure is exactly 102 in fragment 1 and 105 in > fragment 2, as is the sum of the successes for each fragment (of course it > has to to make exactly 1/4). It is rather easy to suspect that it is > actually a 0/1 coding of the type (as in "tick exactly one box"), and not >

Re: [R] glm with binomial errors - problem with overdispersion

lagh and Nelder for the definitions, including of 'scaled deviance')), > but it does change the standard errors. > > > On Mon, 13 Jun 2011, Anna Mill wrote: > > Dear all, >> >> I am new to R and my question may be trivial to you... >> I am doing a GLM wit

[R] glm with binomial errors - problem with overdispersion

Dear all, I am new to R and my question may be trivial to you... I am doing a GLM with binomial errors to compare proportions of species in different categories of seed sizes (4 categories) between 2 sites. In the model summary the residual deviance is much higher than the degree of freedom (Resi