From ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de  Tue Feb 12 16:01:27 2013
From: ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de (Uwe Ligges)
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 16:01:27 +0100
Subject: [Rd] Regression stars
In-Reply-To: <1360680169120-4658268.post@n4.nabble.com>
References: <1360243924659-4657795.post@n4.nabble.com>
	<20130209184801.GD14037@laura>
	<CAC+N9BXeaBzBMGidTJbrBT_hjKM0fW5ey6EWBSBbVqk12LZXGQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAC+N9BVRxcWLtGwHGbBD=4=uAPSan4jEFYfOWsLLqV4FrSyLGA@mail.gmail.com>
	<51180503.1080605@gmail.com>
	<loom.20130212T145313-215@post.gmane.org>
	<511A4F98.50209@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>
	<1360680169120-4658268.post@n4.nabble.com>
Message-ID: <511A5947.2010002@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>



On 12.02.2013 15:42, Frank Harrell wrote:
> Uwe I've been consulting for decades and have never once been asked for such
> stars.

Honestly: last time I have been asked last week.

And when I answered (in another case few months ago) "OK, I can add you 
another 5 stars for p values smaller than 0.5" they did not find it too 
funny.

Best,
Uwe

> And when a clinical researcher puts a sentence in a study protocol
> that P<0.05 will be considered "significant" I get them to take it out.
>
> Frank
>
> Uwe Ligges-3 wrote
>> On 12.02.2013 14:54, Ben Bolker wrote:
>>> Duncan Murdoch
>> <murdoch.duncan <at>
>>   gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>     [snip]
>>>>
>>>> Regarding stringsAsFactors:  I'm not going to defend keeping it as is,
>>>> I'll let the people who like it defend it.
>>>
>>>     Would someone (anyone) like to come forward and give us a defense
>>> of stringsAsFactors=TRUE -- even someone who doesn't personally like
>>> it but would like to play devil's advocate?
>>
>> Sure:
>> I will have to change all my scripts, my teaching examples, my book, and
>> lots of code examples for research and particularly consulting jobs.
>>
>> Personally, I think having stringsAsFactors=TRUE is not too bad for
>> read.table() but less useful for data.frame().
>>
>> And since you ask for the devil's advocate already, related to the
>> subject line: Removing stars is horrible for consulting: With all those
>> people from biology, medicine and other fields who even ask us questions
>> in term of significance stars that are obviously very common for them.
>> Many of them will certainly ask us for the stars, and ask us to switch
>> to another software product once they do not get it from R. They may not
>> be interested in being taught about the advantages or disadvantages of
>> p-values or stars.
>>
>> There are different use cases of R, and I want to keep stars for
>> consulting tasks where things have to be delivered within minutes. I am
>> happy with or without for teaching, where I have the time and can easily
>> talk about the sense and nonsense of p-values.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Uwe
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> What I will likely do is
>>>> make a few changes so that character vectors are automatically changed
>>>> to factors in modelling functions, so that operating with
>>>> stringsAsFactors=FALSE doesn't trigger silly warnings.
>>>>
>>>> Duncan Murdoch
>>>>
>>>
>>>    [apologies for snipping context: "gmane made me do it"]
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________
>>>
>
>> R-devel@
>
>>   mailing list
>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>
>> R-devel@
>
>>   mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
>
>
>
>
> -----
> Frank Harrell
> Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University
> --
> View this message in context: http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Regression-stars-tp4657795p4658268.html
> Sent from the R devel mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>



[Rd] Regression stars
Uwe Ligges