# A Quick Note in Weighting with nlme

**i'm a chordata! urochordata! » R**, and kindly contributed to R-bloggers]. (You can report issue about the content on this page here)

Want to share your content on R-bloggers? click here if you have a blog, or here if you don't.

I’ve been doing a lot of meta-analytic things lately. More on that anon. But one quick thing that came up was variance weighting with mixed models in R, and after a few web searches, I wanted to post this, more as a note-to-self and others than anything. Now, in a simple linear model, weighting by variance or sample size is straightforward.

#variance lm(y ~ x, data = dat, weights = 1/v) #sample size lm(y ~ x, data = dat, weights = n) |

You can use the same sort of weights argument with lmer. But, what about if you’re using nlme? There are reasons to do so. Things change a bit, as nlme uses a wide array of weighting functions for the variance to give it some wonderful flexibility – indeed, it’s a reason to use nlme in the first place! But, for such a simple case, to get the equivalent of the above, here’s the tricky little difference. I’m using gls, generalized least squares, but this should work for lme as well.

#variance gls(y ~ x, data=dat, weights = ~v) #sample size gls(y ~ x, data = dat, weights = ~1/n) |

OK, end note to self. Thanks to John Griffin for prompting this.

**leave a comment**for the author, please follow the link and comment on their blog:

**i'm a chordata! urochordata! » R**.

R-bloggers.com offers

**daily e-mail updates**about R news and tutorials about learning R and many other topics. Click here if you're looking to post or find an R/data-science job.

Want to share your content on R-bloggers? click here if you have a blog, or here if you don't.