Re: [R] lsmeans

From: hadley wickham <>
Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2008 18:04:50 -0500

On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 3:02 PM, John Fox <> wrote:
> Dear Dieter,
> I don't know whether I qualify as a "master," but here's my brief take on
> the subject: First, I dislike the term "least-squares means," which seems to
> me like nonsense. Second, what I prefer to call "effect displays" are just
> judiciously chosen regions of the response surface of a model, meant to
> clarify effects in complex models. For example, a two-way interaction is
> displayed by absorbing the constant and main-effect terms in the interaction
> (more generally, absorbing terms marginal to a particular term) and setting
> other terms to typical values. A table or graph of the resulting fitted
> values is, I would argue, easier to grasp than the coefficients, the
> interpretation of which can entail complicated mental arithmetic.

The other advantage is that the effects values are on the same scale as the original data, and it can be useful to supplement the pure effects with the original data.



______________________________________________ mailing list
PLEASE do read the posting guide
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Received on Sat 07 Jun 2008 - 23:08:54 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 08 Jun 2008 - 01:30:38 GMT.

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

list of date sections of archive