I am not a statistician, but what the p-value is telling me?

Is not more important the effect size?

Best,

Manuel

On 28/03/2011 04:40 p.m., Ben Bolker wrote:
> On 03/28/2011 06:15 PM, John Maindonald wrote:
>
>> Elimination of a term with a p-value greater than say 0.15 or 0.2 is
>> however likely to make little differences to estimates of other terms
>> in the model.  Thus, it may be a reasonable way to proceed.  For
>> this purpose, an anti-conservative (smaller than it should be)
>> p-value will usually serve the purpose.
>    Note that naive likelihood ratio tests of random effects are likely to
> be conservative (in the simplest case, true p-values are twice the
> nominal value) because of boundary issues and those of fixed effects are
> probably anticonservative because of finite-size effects (see PB 2000
> for examples of both cases.)
>
>> John Maindonald             email: john.maindonald@anu.edu.au
>> phone : +61 2 (6125)3473    fax  : +61 2(6125)5549
>> Centre for Mathematics&  Its Applications, Room 1194,
>> John Dedman Mathematical Sciences Building (Building 27)
>> Australian National University, Canberra ACT 0200.
>> http://www.maths.anu.edu.au/~johnm
>>
>    Ben
>
> _______________________________________________
> R-sig-mixed-models@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models
>
>


-- 
*Manuel Spínola, Ph.D.*
Instituto Internacional en Conservación y Manejo de Vida Silvestre
Universidad Nacional
Apartado 1350-3000
Heredia
COSTA RICA
mspinola@una.ac.cr
mspinola10@gmail.com
Teléfono: (506) 2277-3598
Fax: (506) 2237-7036
Personal website: Lobito de río 
<https://sites.google.com/site/lobitoderio/>
Institutional website: ICOMVIS <http://www.icomvis.una.ac.cr/>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]


