Abstract

Most ecological studies with multiple independent variables use null hypothesis testing with full or stepwise models, or AICc-based model selection, but these approaches have not yet been compared using simulated data with known effect sizes. We compared these using ecologically relevant sample sizes, effect sizes, predictor numbers, collinearity and different degrees of explorative setups. Sample size and collinearity governed parameter identification success and parameter estimation accuracy, while the effect of the statistical modeling approach was comparatively smaller. Stepwise regression increased false detection rate compared with full models in settings where this error rate was overall low, but generally reduced the high detection failure rate in small samples. When reintroducing removed predictors to the final model, stepwise regression often improved the accuracy of point estimates relative to full models. The performance of AICc model selection and model averaging depended on the exact method,...

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.