+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Is GLM to best for my data

  1. #1
    Points: 4, Level: 1
    Level completed: 7%, Points required for next Level: 46

    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Is GLM to best for my data


    I want to look at abundance of fleas on their hosts, so there are zero counts.

    I have looked and found that GLM with family = poisson and log link should be suitable. However, for my explanatory variables I have Sample Site, Sex and body length (mm). Obviously, body length is a continuous variable. Is it valid to use a continuous variable in a GLM. I can get R to run the model

    > T2fit <- glm(intensity~Gender2+ocL+Site,data=teminfest2, family=poisson (link = "log"))

    but I wanted to check that this was actually OK to do.


  2. #2
    Omega Contributor
    Points: 38,289, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    hlsmith's Avatar
    Not Ames, IA
    Thanked 1,185 Times in 1,146 Posts

    Re: Is GLM to best for my data

    Not an R person, but it all seems fine to me. Many times people will also examine negative binomial and zero inflated distributions if it seems like they have many zero counts. It would be the exact same set-up, but I would guess the family= option would be something other than poisson.
    Stop cowardice, ban guns!

  3. #3
    TS Contributor
    Points: 12,227, Level: 72
    Level completed: 45%, Points required for next Level: 223
    rogojel's Avatar
    I work in Europe, live in Hungary
    Thanked 332 Times in 312 Posts

    Re: Is GLM to best for my data

    Just a auick question : are you sure you have no interactions? If not, you would probably need to start with a model including interactions and eliminate insignificant terms to get the right model.


+ Reply to Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Advertise on Talk Stats