Re: [R] lm for log log

From: Ekaterina Pek <>
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 19:38:59 +0200

Hi, Ted.

Thanks for your reply. It helped. I have further a bit of questions.

> It may be that lm(log(b) ~ log(a)) is, from a substantive point of view,
> a more appropriate model for whetever it is than lm(b ~ a). Or it may
> not be. This is a separate question. Again, Spearman's rho is not
> definitive.

How one determines if one linear model is more appropriate than another ? And : linear model "log(b) ~ log(a)" is okay ? I hesitated to use such thing from the beginning, because it seemed to me like it would have meant a nonlinear model rather than linear.. (Sorry, if the question is stupid, I'm not that good at statistics)

Kate. mailing list PLEASE do read the posting guide and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. Received on Sun 20 Jun 2010 - 17:42:27 GMT

Archive maintained by Robert King, hosted by the discipline of statistics at the University of Newcastle, Australia.
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0, at Sun 20 Jun 2010 - 21:50:34 GMT.

Mailing list information is available at Please read the posting guide before posting to the list.

list of date sections of archive