LISTSERV at the University of Georgia
Menubar Imagemap
Home Browse Manage Request Manuals Register
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (June 2005)Back to main SPSSX-L pageJoin or leave SPSSX-L (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:   Fri, 17 Jun 2005 07:42:53 -0500
Reply-To:   "Peck, Jon" <peck@spss.com>
Sender:   "SPSSX(r) Discussion" <SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:   "Peck, Jon" <peck@spss.com>
Subject:   Re: Unexpected singularities
Comments:   To: ar7347@wayne.edu
Content-Type:   text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Might you have missing data in the dependent variable that causes there to be no valid cases for one of the categories?

System missing values (the periods), by the way, are always excluded, but in a transformation, you can use the sysmis function to handle them. sysmis(x) returns 1 if x is system missing and zero otherwise. And RECODE, for example, has a special keyword, SYSMIS, for referring to system missing.

-----Original Message----- From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Rayman Mohamed Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 7:35 AM To: SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: [SPSSX-L] Unexpected singularities

Hector and Jon,

Thanks for your replies and the heads-up on more efficient syntax. WRT to Jon's comment, I get the same singularity message even when I drop all the other predictors, i.e., I use political affiliations as the only predictors.

I have three related issues that might together help me clear this up.


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SPSSX-L page