[R] effect sizes

2011-04-06 Thread netrunner
Dear all,
I used the friedman.test.with.post.hoc in my analysis to compare the scores
of three groups , but I would like to compute also the effect sizes. Anyone
can help me? 

thank you

net

--
View this message in context: 
http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/effect-sizes-tp3431058p3431058.html
Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.


Re: [R] Effect sizes

2007-10-29 Thread Thomas Lumley

t.test() does give effect sizes: that is, it gives the actual difference 
in means, and a confidence interval for this difference.

If you want to standardize your effect sizes you will have to do this 
yourself.  This is because the customs for standardization are different 
in different fields.  Many social sciences use the residual standard 
deviation, but epidemiology and medicine typically use the measured units 
(and where standardization is done, prefer to use %), and other 
standardizations are possible.

It's quite possible that there are packages that do all of this for you. 
If so, someone is likely to point them out.

-thomas


On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Jenifer Larson-Hall wrote:

 I'm just curious . . . if effect sizes are so important, and possibly a 
 better way of looking at results than p-values, since they don't depend 
 on effect size (Kline,2004; Murphy and Myors, 2004), why don't any of 
 the classical tests, like t.test or glht specified for Tukey's posthocs, 
 return effect sizes? I say classical because I'm sure there may be 
 packages out there, not in the base program, which do return effect 
 sizes, but do they also return everything glht does, which are 
 confidence intervals for mean differences, t-values and p-values, 
 standard error plus a cool MMC graph? Anyway, just wondering. I mean, 
 it's not that hard to calculate effect sizes on my own, but it seems 
 like if they were important they would be included . . .

 Jenifer

 Dr. Jenifer Larson-Hall
 Assistant Professor of Linguistics
 University of North Texas
 (940)369-8950

 __
 R-help@r-project.org mailing list
 https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
 PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
 and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.


Thomas Lumley   Assoc. Professor, Biostatistics
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   University of Washington, Seattle

__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.


[R] Effect sizes

2007-10-26 Thread Jenifer Larson-Hall
I'm just curious . . . if effect sizes are so important, and possibly a better 
way of looking at results than p-values, since they don't depend on effect size 
(Kline,2004; Murphy and Myors, 2004),  why don't any of the classical tests, 
like t.test or glht specified for Tukey's posthocs, return effect sizes? I say 
classical because I'm sure there may be packages out there, not in the base 
program, which do return effect sizes, but do they also return everything glht 
does, which are confidence intervals for mean differences, t-values and 
p-values, standard error plus a cool MMC graph? Anyway, just wondering. I mean, 
it's not that hard to calculate effect sizes on my own, but it seems like if 
they were important they would be included . . .

Jenifer

Dr. Jenifer Larson-Hall
Assistant Professor of Linguistics
University of North Texas
(940)369-8950

__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.