<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Stepwise model selection for mixed model in Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Stepwise-model-selection-for-mixed-model/m-p/51317#M29093</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Dear all,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I want to&amp;nbsp;use stepwise model selection in order to select important fixed effects from a mixel model (including one random effect).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When changing the "Personality" in the Fit Model Platform from "Standard Least Squares" to "Stepwise" it seems, however, that the same model selection is performed as if I would have a "pure" fixed effects model, not taking into account the random effect. Is there a way to take the random effect into account and then perform the stepwise model selection? I mean, if the random effect causes a large part of the overall variation in the data, this should make a difference, right?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Tina&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:31:49 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Tina</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2018-02-14T16:31:49Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Stepwise model selection for mixed model</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Stepwise-model-selection-for-mixed-model/m-p/51317#M29093</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Dear all,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I want to&amp;nbsp;use stepwise model selection in order to select important fixed effects from a mixel model (including one random effect).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When changing the "Personality" in the Fit Model Platform from "Standard Least Squares" to "Stepwise" it seems, however, that the same model selection is performed as if I would have a "pure" fixed effects model, not taking into account the random effect. Is there a way to take the random effect into account and then perform the stepwise model selection? I mean, if the random effect causes a large part of the overall variation in the data, this should make a difference, right?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Tina&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:31:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Stepwise-model-selection-for-mixed-model/m-p/51317#M29093</guid>
      <dc:creator>Tina</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-02-14T16:31:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Stepwise model selection for mixed model</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Stepwise-model-selection-for-mixed-model/m-p/51321#M29096</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.jmp.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/7898"&gt;@Tina&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;That's always been a tricky situation in JMP since random effects are not supported in Stepwise.&amp;nbsp; If your random effect can temporarily be treated as fixed, you could run stepwise to get to a model and then revert to a random effect at that point.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I usually do a manual model selection in JMP starting with a full model and carefully paring it down.&amp;nbsp; You could always do it that way as well.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best of luck.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:01:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Stepwise-model-selection-for-mixed-model/m-p/51321#M29096</guid>
      <dc:creator>cwillden</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-02-14T17:01:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Stepwise model selection for mixed model</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Stepwise-model-selection-for-mixed-model/m-p/51325#M29099</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi, Tina!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hopefully, you are aware of the fatal statistical flaws of Stepwise.&amp;nbsp; Please reference the attached document from NE SUG 2007.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;A quote from that document: "Most devastatingly, it allows the analyst not to think. Put in another way, for a data analyst to use stepwise methods is equivalent to telling his or her boss that his or her salary should be cut."&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I recommend you eschew Stepwise and try the Generalized Regression personality in the Fit Model platform instead, specifically the Adaptive Lasso.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Good luck!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:27:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Stepwise-model-selection-for-mixed-model/m-p/51325#M29099</guid>
      <dc:creator>Kevin_Anderson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-02-14T18:27:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Stepwise model selection for mixed model</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Stepwise-model-selection-for-mixed-model/m-p/51331#M29105</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;FYI, the methods &lt;a href="https://community.jmp.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/3244"&gt;@Kevin_Anderson&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;suggests are only available in&amp;nbsp;JMP Pro.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2018 19:03:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Stepwise-model-selection-for-mixed-model/m-p/51331#M29105</guid>
      <dc:creator>cwillden</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-02-14T19:03:02Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Stepwise model selection for mixed model</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Stepwise-model-selection-for-mixed-model/m-p/51450#M29173</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.jmp.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/8582"&gt;@cwillden&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;and&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.jmp.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/3244"&gt;@Kevin_Anderson&lt;/a&gt;,&amp;nbsp;thank you very much for your thoughts on that topic and tips!&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As the analysis has to run in "normal" JMP (no Pro version) I will try to pursue the way&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.jmp.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/8582"&gt;@cwillden&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;proposed.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As I always want to have a model containing all main effects and selecting relevant interactions or quadratic effects in addition, I will start from the main effects model and put the random effect as fixed effect during stepwise.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Tina&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2018 15:19:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Stepwise-model-selection-for-mixed-model/m-p/51450#M29173</guid>
      <dc:creator>Tina</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-02-16T15:19:05Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

