Dear Kathryn, I assume that MWDError is the error variance associated with MWD. If MWD is a standardized variable (i.e., with a variance of 1) then 59% of its variance is unaccounted for.
I hope this helps, John -------------------------------- John Fox Senator William McMaster Professor of Social Statistics Department of Sociology McMaster University Hamilton, Ontario, Canada web: socserv.mcmaster.ca/jfox > -----Original Message----- > From: r-help-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On > Behalf Of Kathryn Barto > Sent: February-09-10 6:23 AM > To: r-help@r-project.org > Subject: [R] interpreting error estimate in SEM > > hi, > > I'm using the sem package, and I want to make sure I'm interpreting the > output correctly. Here is an excerpt of my output. When I report the MWD > error, should I say that 59% of the variation in MWD is not explained by the > model, or that 59% of the variation is explained, or something entirely > different. > > Parameter Estimates > Estimate Std Error z value Pr(>|z|) > NplantRoots 0.462029 0.120803 3.82466 1.3095e-04 plantRoots <-- > - N > ... > CoError 1.000011 0.151850 6.58553 4.5325e-11 Co <--> Co > carbonateError 1.000009 0.156217 6.40142 1.5394e-10 carbonate <--> > carbonate > MWDError 0.589788 0.092128 6.40185 1.5351e-10 MWD <--> MWD > > Thanks > Kathryn > > ______________________________________________ > R-help@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help > PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
