[R] type III ANOVA for a nested linear model
richard.rowe at jcu.edu.au
Thu Jul 12 01:55:24 CEST 2007
Mark Difford wrote:
> Indeed! And, apropos of the expression, "to be Ripleyed" (and so be
> condemned to eating cookies for a long, long time), what about being
> Simon Blomberg-4 wrote:
>> I second the nomination!
>> On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 10:02 -0600, Greg Snow wrote:
>>> I nominate the following 2 pieces from Bill's reply for fortunes
>>> (probably 2 separate fortunes):
>>>> All this becomes even more glaring if you take the unusal
>>>> step of plotting the data.
>>>> What sort of editor would overlook this clear and
>>>> demonstrable message leaping out from the data in favour of
>>>> some arcane argument about "types of sums of squares"?
>>>> Several answers come to mind: A power freak, a SAS
>>>> afficianado, an idiot.
More seriously on this topic is the need to educate editors. Few editors
in the biological field (real biology, biomed etc) appear to have, or if
they have, to exercise, any sort of near current judgment on statistical
methods, techniques or interpretations. Referees often have no knowledge
of analysis and editors blindly back their referee ... (my own pet gripe
here is being asked for replicates when showing the existence of a
phenomenon ... The assertion 'all swans are black' is refuted by the
observation of a white swan ... Referee: how many replicates did the
researcher have? There appears to be a single sample here; where is the
confidence interval on the proportion of white swans?).
A little learning is a dangerous thing ... (Pope) ... and most
biological editors may have a compulsory undergraduate subject in their
distant background, from which they remember 'Yates' correction' and 'no
cell with fewer than 5 observations' (sic),
Dr Richard Rowe
Zoology & Tropical Ecology
School of Tropical Biology
James Cook University
ph +61 7 47 81 4851
fax +61 7 47 25 1570
JCU has CRICOS Provider Code 00117J
More information about the R-help