Skip to main content
Cross Validated

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

3
  • $\begingroup$ Related: stats.stackexchange.com/q/449111/97844 $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 11 at 0:24
  • $\begingroup$ Are you making inferences about some more abstract thing X (e.g. "tree growth") on the basis of all three? Or are you making separate inferences of the three (i.e. , "yield is affected by genotype" is a separate inference from "height is affected by genotype" etc.)? $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 11 at 7:38
  • $\begingroup$ Instead of performing 1 regression for each outcome, consider a multivariate regression that models all 3 outcomes together. The point estimates will be the same as for 3 separate models, but the (co)variances will take the correlations among outcomes into account. This document shows how to do that in R. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 11 at 14:09