I've been having a problem with using check_overdispersion() on a binomial glm. The dataset is quite small and overdispersion is expected (due to the impact of weather etc), but check_overdispersion() reports no overdispersion.
I asked at DHARMa
florianhartig/DHARMa#502
I was told that the DHARMa default dispersion test would have low power, and I should instead use the Pearson Chi-squared test instead.
What is the reason for check_overdispersion with a binomial GLM using DHARMa's dispersion test with simulated data rather than the Pearson Chi-squared test (which I think is being used for Poisson GLMs)? Would it be possible to give users a choice?
Incidentally, trying to plot the result of check_overdispersion() with a binomial glm gives an error
performance::check_overdispersion(mod1) |> plot()
# Error in .model_diagnostic_overdispersion(model) : object 'd' not found
I think the problem is that the code does not reject unsupported models.
I've been having a problem with using
check_overdispersion()on a binomial glm. The dataset is quite small and overdispersion is expected (due to the impact of weather etc), butcheck_overdispersion()reports no overdispersion.I asked at DHARMa
florianhartig/DHARMa#502
I was told that the DHARMa default dispersion test would have low power, and I should instead use the Pearson Chi-squared test instead.
What is the reason for
check_overdispersionwith a binomial GLM using DHARMa's dispersion test with simulated data rather than the Pearson Chi-squared test (which I think is being used for Poisson GLMs)? Would it be possible to give users a choice?Incidentally, trying to plot the result of check_overdispersion() with a binomial glm gives an error
I think the problem is that the code does not reject unsupported models.