Timeline for Why is it possible to get significant F statistic (p<.001) but non-significant regressor t-tests?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 25, 2017 at 19:21 | history | post merged (destination) | |||
| Aug 19, 2011 at 14:27 | comment | added | Macro | I never said there wasn't valid information or intuition supplied by this reply. If I had a good answer for this question I'd have responded by now - it's kind of a tough question - I was only saying that this response doesn't seem to answer the question in any sense of the word. | |
| Aug 19, 2011 at 14:18 | comment | added | whuber♦ | @Macro The downvote seems a little harsh, because there is a useful and valid observation in this reply: the tests for overall significance and for individual variable significance "answer different questions." Admittedly that's qualitative, but no more so then the first answer with many upvotes; and to that answer it adds some valid intuition, arguably making it an improvement over that answer. | |
| Aug 19, 2011 at 10:46 | comment | added | Macro | (-1) Yes - the original poster is noting that he/she has seen it happen too. The question was what exactly are some things that may cause this other than collinearity and I don't see how this is an answer. | |
| Aug 19, 2011 at 10:11 | history | answered | Peter Flom | CC BY-SA 3.0 |