Search found 281 matches
- Mon May 06, 2024 9:06 pm
- Forum: Help
- Topic: Post hoc tests in Walrus (Robust ANOVA)
- Replies: 6
- Views: 4264
Re: Post hoc tests in Walrus (Robust ANOVA)
Oh. OK. So it looks like the other value of supp (i.e., "VC") is excluded completely from the interaction post-hoc test. So probably best to just remove the "interaction" post-hoc test table since, for whatever reason, it doesn't actually work right.
- Mon May 06, 2024 2:45 pm
- Forum: Help
- Topic: Post hoc tests in Walrus (Robust ANOVA)
- Replies: 6
- Views: 4264
Re: Post hoc tests in Walrus (Robust ANOVA)
I would also have doubts. For example, in a Walrus (bootstrap) robust ANOVA on the Tooth Growth Data, I think there should be 15 post-hoc comparison. But the output produces only 3.
- Wed May 01, 2024 2:34 pm
- Forum: General
- Topic: Reorder output
- Replies: 15
- Views: 29784
Re: Reorder output
I found a non-technical work-around: I simply include a 'table of contents' telling the reader wear to look in the numbered-but-out-of-order analyses. For example . . . RESULTS Contents Response Time General Descriptives for RT (#5) ANOVA of RT (#3) Rj planned comparisons for ANOVA of RT (#6) Accura...
- Thu Apr 25, 2024 4:09 pm
- Forum: Statistics
- Topic: Independant Samples t-Test: Assumption Checks?
- Replies: 3
- Views: 728
Re: Independant Samples t-Test: Assumption Checks?
I believe it's the residuals for the entire model that need no be normally distributed. https://statistics.laerd.com/statistical-guides/independent-t-test-statistical-guide.php#:~:text=Assumption%20of%20normality%20of%20the,give%20you%20the%20same%20result. Also, since the Shapiro-Wilk test is a sig...
- Wed Apr 24, 2024 1:16 pm
- Forum: General
- Topic: seolmatrix
- Replies: 5
- Views: 814
Re: seolmatrix
What I've found is that many institutional computers have app blockers that may allow core aspects of jamovi to run while blocking other aspects. I've found that this blocking is especially likely to affect modules. Moreover, I've found seolmatrix to be more affected than any other jamovi module I u...
- Thu Apr 18, 2024 12:31 pm
- Forum: Statistics
- Topic: Contigency tables
- Replies: 6
- Views: 779
Re: Contigency tables
Oh. Sorry. However, I think those comparative measures are only computable in situation where the analysis can be conceptualized as comparing two things (to proportions, two ratios, etc.). Thus, they only work for 2 by 2 tables: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/chisquare/chisquare.pdf I've se...
- Fri Apr 12, 2024 2:55 am
- Forum: Statistics
- Topic: Contigency tables
- Replies: 6
- Views: 779
Re: Contigency tables
Hi. jamovi's chi square contingency analyses aren't limited to 2 by 2. 3 by 4 works just fine.
- Sat Mar 23, 2024 7:19 pm
- Forum: jamovi development
- Topic: Jamovi to support Apple Silicon chips
- Replies: 7
- Views: 5065
Re: Jamovi to support Apple Silicon chips
@jonathan Is there supposed to be a jamovi Version 2.5.x for Windows, or is the new version only for non-Windows platforms?
- Sat Mar 23, 2024 2:08 pm
- Forum: Statistics
- Topic: Comparing a mix of paired and unpaired data?
- Replies: 8
- Views: 2832
Re: Comparing a mix of paired and unpaired data?
The quantified parameter needs to be a 'close-enough' approximation to interval/ratio. Most analysts think that the kind of scores you have are close enough. You can adjust for multiple comparisons. You'll need to use something like jamovi's Rj module (or R). See the example code, below: # This code...
- Sat Mar 23, 2024 12:01 am
- Forum: Statistics
- Topic: Comparing a mix of paired and unpaired data?
- Replies: 8
- Views: 2832
Re: Comparing a mix of paired and unpaired data?
Within the context of traditional, well-known statistical analyses, I don't think a "mix of paired and unpaired data" is analyzable in any streamlined way. You have three groups rather than four, and you need to do a set of t tests--most of which will be independent-samples t tests, and on...