<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Alternative to PROC GLM for not normally distributed data + circle data in Statistical Procedures</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-to-PROC-GLM-for-not-normally-distributed-data-circle/m-p/831284#M41148</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have two questions.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1) I have a dataset where neither the errors or the data are normally distributed. I had been using PROC GLM, but discovered that this usually reguires normally distributed errors. However, I also read in some (unofficial) articles that if the sample size is large enough you can still use det procedure. Is this true? If it is true, how large a sample size are we talking? I have two sites with 240 and 960 observations respectively, which I believe to be quite large.&lt;BR /&gt;If it is not true that a not normally distributed sample can be used in PROC GLM as long as the sample size is large enough then which procedure do you suggest instead? I tried using PROC GENMOD, but I am not interested in the correlation between two variables. I want to know if the (mean) age in one site differs significantly from (mean) age in the second site.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2) I also have a more statistical question.&lt;BR /&gt;I collected my data from circles. The data has to do with trees. I logged the age and diameter of each tree in the circle. I then measured the distance to the nearest piece of deadwood for each tree. I wanted to prove that there is a correlation between the age/diameter of the tree and the distance to deadwood. I believed proximity to deadwood stimulate the growth of the trees. However, I was not able to prove this (I used PROC CORR).&lt;BR /&gt;My statistics professor told me that the fact that the data is collected from a circle can be at risk of creating false patterns and therefore make it difficult to prove anything (without running simulations which is outside my capability to be honest).&lt;BR /&gt;I have attempted to simply illustrate my&amp;nbsp; data-collection in photo below:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Green is trees. Brown is deadwood. Red is measured distance." style="width: 588px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://communities.sas.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/74912i79FBE25D450C9626/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="pastedImage.png" alt="Green is trees. Brown is deadwood. Red is measured distance." /&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-caption" onclick="event.preventDefault();"&gt;Green is trees. Brown is deadwood. Red is measured distance.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;DIV class=""&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best regards&lt;BR /&gt;Maja&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2022 15:23:28 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Lysegroentblad</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2022-08-31T15:23:28Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Alternative to PROC GLM for not normally distributed data + circle data</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-to-PROC-GLM-for-not-normally-distributed-data-circle/m-p/831284#M41148</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have two questions.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1) I have a dataset where neither the errors or the data are normally distributed. I had been using PROC GLM, but discovered that this usually reguires normally distributed errors. However, I also read in some (unofficial) articles that if the sample size is large enough you can still use det procedure. Is this true? If it is true, how large a sample size are we talking? I have two sites with 240 and 960 observations respectively, which I believe to be quite large.&lt;BR /&gt;If it is not true that a not normally distributed sample can be used in PROC GLM as long as the sample size is large enough then which procedure do you suggest instead? I tried using PROC GENMOD, but I am not interested in the correlation between two variables. I want to know if the (mean) age in one site differs significantly from (mean) age in the second site.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2) I also have a more statistical question.&lt;BR /&gt;I collected my data from circles. The data has to do with trees. I logged the age and diameter of each tree in the circle. I then measured the distance to the nearest piece of deadwood for each tree. I wanted to prove that there is a correlation between the age/diameter of the tree and the distance to deadwood. I believed proximity to deadwood stimulate the growth of the trees. However, I was not able to prove this (I used PROC CORR).&lt;BR /&gt;My statistics professor told me that the fact that the data is collected from a circle can be at risk of creating false patterns and therefore make it difficult to prove anything (without running simulations which is outside my capability to be honest).&lt;BR /&gt;I have attempted to simply illustrate my&amp;nbsp; data-collection in photo below:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Green is trees. Brown is deadwood. Red is measured distance." style="width: 588px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://communities.sas.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/74912i79FBE25D450C9626/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="pastedImage.png" alt="Green is trees. Brown is deadwood. Red is measured distance." /&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-caption" onclick="event.preventDefault();"&gt;Green is trees. Brown is deadwood. Red is measured distance.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;DIV class=""&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best regards&lt;BR /&gt;Maja&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2022 15:23:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-to-PROC-GLM-for-not-normally-distributed-data-circle/m-p/831284#M41148</guid>
      <dc:creator>Lysegroentblad</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-08-31T15:23:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Alternative to PROC GLM for not normally distributed data + circle data</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-to-PROC-GLM-for-not-normally-distributed-data-circle/m-p/831293#M41149</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;As a bare minimum I would suggest sharing the Proc GLM code you are attempting.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Better would be to include the LOG from running the procedure. Copy the text from the log including the procedure code and any messages associated, then on the forum open a text box using the &amp;lt;/&amp;gt; icon above the main message window and paste the text.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The entire code helps see what potential issues may arise from your option choices. The log helps if there are thing like record exclusions happening or some other data issues.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Best would be include some example data in the form of a data step so we can see what type of things you have.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Measurement units may be a good idea as well.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You picture doesn't help a great deal as there is not much of a description as to why/how that circle is selected. Distance from each individual tree to deadwood shouldn't be affected by that circle though I can see some possible modeling with multiple trees being equidistant to the same "deadwood".&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2022 15:46:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-to-PROC-GLM-for-not-normally-distributed-data-circle/m-p/831293#M41149</guid>
      <dc:creator>ballardw</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-08-31T15:46:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Alternative to PROC GLM for not normally distributed data + circle data</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-to-PROC-GLM-for-not-normally-distributed-data-circle/m-p/831324#M41150</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;1) For nonparametric univariate tests, look at &lt;STRONG&gt;proc NPAR1WAY&lt;/STRONG&gt;. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test for example is based on ranks and does not assume normality.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2022 17:54:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-to-PROC-GLM-for-not-normally-distributed-data-circle/m-p/831324#M41150</guid>
      <dc:creator>PGStats</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-08-31T17:54:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Alternative to PROC GLM for not normally distributed data + circle data</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-to-PROC-GLM-for-not-normally-distributed-data-circle/m-p/831332#M41151</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;2) If I understand correctly, the nearest deadwood is the one found inside the circle, but it could also be closer, lying just outside the circle. So what you have is interval-censored data. The true shortest distance lies in the interval (nearest distance to the circle, measured distance). Ask your professor about the appropriateness of censored data analysis for your data. &lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2022 19:13:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-to-PROC-GLM-for-not-normally-distributed-data-circle/m-p/831332#M41151</guid>
      <dc:creator>PGStats</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-08-31T19:13:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Alternative to PROC GLM for not normally distributed data + circle data</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-to-PROC-GLM-for-not-normally-distributed-data-circle/m-p/831401#M41155</link>
      <description>Hi &lt;a href="https://communities.sas.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/462"&gt;@PGStats&lt;/a&gt; ,&lt;BR /&gt;Thank you so much. Wilcoxon was exactly what I was looking for.&lt;BR /&gt;And also, thank you suggesting my second question had to do with interval-censored data. I think this is exactly what my professor meant.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;MJ</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2022 13:00:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-to-PROC-GLM-for-not-normally-distributed-data-circle/m-p/831401#M41155</guid>
      <dc:creator>Lysegroentblad</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-09-01T13:00:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

