Re: CLT and regression
- From: "Old Mac User" <chendrixstats@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: 20 Apr 2006 09:43:38 -0700
You wrote...
"Any kind of nonlinear transformation will destroy a
putative linear relation. So, no transformations
without an outstanding reason, not involving the data."
I respectively suggest this this makes no sense at all.
If the data (scores) is bounded by 0 - 100... and if you
fit those data without any transformation of the scores
(such as a logistic transformation)... then your finished
model will be capable of predicting outcomes less than
0 and/or greater than 100. That alone is sufficient to
say "use a constraining transformation that will prevent
silly predictions." This is another way of saying that if
you don't do this, your model will not pass the red-face test.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: CLT and regression
- From: Herman Rubin
- Re: CLT and regression
- From: Jerry Dallal
- Re: CLT and regression
- From: Frank E Harrell Jr
- Re: CLT and regression
- References:
- CLT and regression
- From: r . c . reulen
- Re: CLT and regression
- From: Anon.
- Re: CLT and regression
- From: Herman Rubin
- CLT and regression
- Prev by Date: Re: CLT and regression
- Next by Date: Re: CLT and regression
- Previous by thread: Re: CLT and regression
- Next by thread: Re: CLT and regression
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|