Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: st: OLS assumptions not met: transformation, gls, or glm as solutions?
From
Nick Cox <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: OLS assumptions not met: transformation, gls, or glm as solutions?
Date
Mon, 17 Dec 2012 16:53:27 +0000
I agreed. If you want to talk about quantile regression, then the
focus changes.
Nick
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 4:45 PM, JVerkuilen (Gmail)
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Nick Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
>> We can converge by holding fast to the idea that regression is about
>> modelling the conditional mean. If you have a inappropriate model for
>> the conditional mean, wondering how well you can fit it is not a very
>> interesting or useful question.
>
> Well conditional quantities, most typically the conditional mean, but
> of course there's conditional quantiles, conditional variances, etc.,
> depending on what you want to know. But 100%, if the model itself is
> bad then you are well and truly scrod.
>
> I'm sure all of us in our history as data analysts (broadly speaking)
> have committed some real doozies in that regard. I know I have.
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/