Hi,
there are issues with your analysis, but let me first solve the problem of the garbled names. You defined group as a nominal variable but then you put it in the model as a continuous variable (covariate). That creates the name mis-encoding. If you really want to consider `group` as a continuous ...
Search found 3 matches
- Fri May 13, 2022 2:32 pm
- Forum: Statistics
- Topic: Multilevel modeling and post-hoc analysis
- Replies: 4
- Views: 11501
- Mon May 09, 2022 1:17 am
- Forum: Statistics
- Topic: Multilevel modeling and post-hoc analysis
- Replies: 4
- Views: 11501
Re: Multilevel modeling and post-hoc analysis
Hi
the first issue is surprising because estimating the posthoc does not affect the model estimation at all, so you should not see any difference in the model results whether you ask for the posthoc tests or not. If you, however, are comparing two models with and without a between-group variable ...
the first issue is surprising because estimating the posthoc does not affect the model estimation at all, so you should not see any difference in the model results whether you ask for the posthoc tests or not. If you, however, are comparing two models with and without a between-group variable ...
- Mon Apr 25, 2022 7:43 am
- Forum: Statistics
- Topic: Multilevel modeling and post-hoc analysis
- Replies: 4
- Views: 11501
Multilevel modeling and post-hoc analysis
Hi everyone!
I am new to multilevel modeling and jamovi. :grin:
I've come up with the following questions when doing the MLM with the "Mixed Model" module:
1. When I was performing the Bonferroni post-hoc tests for one of the between-group independent variables, I noticed there was a shrinkage ...
I am new to multilevel modeling and jamovi. :grin:
I've come up with the following questions when doing the MLM with the "Mixed Model" module:
1. When I was performing the Bonferroni post-hoc tests for one of the between-group independent variables, I noticed there was a shrinkage ...