Cited by 99Statistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceAgriculture, Soil, Plant ScienceStatistical Methods and Applications

How to Make Models Add Up — A Primer on GLMMs

O'Hara, Robert B.·2009·Annales Zoologici Fennici

Abstract

Many problems in the analysis of ecological data have the format where there is an observed response that may be predicted by several covariates. Although the response can take several forms (e.g. measurements, counts, observations of presence/absence), and the covariates can also vary (e.g. be measurements themselves, or be grouped according to the treatment applied, the time or location of of sampling, etc.), most of these problems can be handled in a single framework, the Generalized Linear Mixed Model (GLMM). The framework encompasses regression, ANOVA, generalized linear models, and equivalent models with random as well as fixed effects. Here, the different parts of the GLMM are described, building from regression and ANOVA to show how the extra components — the wider range of distributions, and random effects — can be added into the same framework, and how the parameters of the fitted model can be estimated and interpreted. Being able to handle data with GLMMs helps ecologists to analyse the majority of their data.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5735/086.046.0205

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recent advances make it possible to fit generalized linear mixed models with a variety of error distributions or to use randomization techniques such as bootstrapping.

    “Recent advances in statistical modeling appear to have solved this problem, because it is now possible to fit generalized linear mixed models “glmm” with a variety of error distributions (e.g., binomial, Poisson, zero-inflated Poisson, negative binomial; Harrison et al., 2018; O'Hara, 2009) or to use a range of randomization techniques such as bootstrapping (Good, 2005)”

    From Violating the normality assumption may be the lesser of two evils (2021) · cites this paper as O'Hara, 2009

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 21 · Cited by 99

Authors
O'Hara, R. B.
Venue
Annales Zoologici Fennici
Published
2009-04
Volume
46
Issue
2
Pages
124-137
ISSN
  • 0003-455X (ISSN-L)
  • 1797-2450
OpenAlex
W2157372322
Cited by
99
References
21
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 7
FWCI
6.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annales Zoologici Fennici (publishedVersion)
  • BioOne Complete (BioOne) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Agriculture, Soil, Plant Science
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
Keywords
generalized linear mixed models, random effects, fixed effects, ecological data analysis, count data, presence-absence data, model interpretation, parameter estimation, regression analysis, analysis of variance, generalized linear models

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review