Bookmark and Share

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: RE: "Proper" usage: Univariate, bivariate, multivariate, multivariable


From   Joe Canner <jcanner1@jhmi.edu>
To   "statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu" <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>
Subject   RE: st: RE: "Proper" usage: Univariate, bivariate, multivariate, multivariable
Date   Tue, 15 Oct 2013 23:38:44 +0000

Nicole,

I didn't notice on first reading that Hidalgo and Goodman equated independent and response variables.  It seems that this is either a mistake or a non-standard use of the term "response variable".  I think your understanding is correct.

There is a letter to the editor regarding this article that delves a little into the univariate/univariable and bivariate/bivariable discussion.  Personally, I would find it confusing, even if it was technically correct and perfectly consistent, to refer to all analyses with one dependent variable as "univariate".  If nothing else, SAS would have to find another name for PROC UNIVARIATE. :)

Joe
________________________________________
From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] on behalf of Nicole Boyle [nicboyle@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 6:40 PM
To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: st: RE: "Proper" usage: Univariate, bivariate, multivariate, multivariable

Hi Joe,

Thanks for the very topical article! From yours and Nick's responses,
it appears that the multivariable vs. multivariate distinction is
mainly acknowledged in biostatistics and epidemiology (if at all).
Similar to you, I recall a biostatistics professor mention this
distinction in passing.



© Copyright 1996–2018 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index