Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 11:18:08 -0800
Reply-To: Bruce Weaver <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sender: "SPSSX(r) Discussion" <SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: Bruce Weaver <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: logistic regression
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> I did not include interactions. Would it be better to include them? The
> syntax is correct, I think. The predictors correlate with each other.
> Could this be the problem? I have read that it is only a problem, if the
> correlation is about .80?
> In the models, including only one or two predictors (each significant),
> the Hosmer-Lemshow Test is also significant, indicating a bad model fit? I
> dont know, what to do now. Would a stepwise logistic regression be better?
> Should I exclude predictors?
> Hope, you can help me!
> Best wishes,
It's still not at all clear to me what question or questions you're trying
to answer with your analysis. Is there one? Or are you on a fishing
Stepwise selection is almost always unwise.
"When all else fails, RTFM."
NOTE: My Hotmail account is not monitored regularly.
To send me an e-mail, please use the address shown above.
View this message in context: http://spssx-discussion.1045642.n5.nabble.com/logistic-regression-tp3284334p3286590.html
Sent from the SPSSX Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command