On 28 Feb 2002 07:37:16 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brad Anderson)
wrote:
Rich Ulrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
On 27 Feb 2002 11:59:53 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brad Anderson)
wrote:
BA
I have a continuous response variable that ranges from 0 to 750
of non-normality. Please
do give references if you are replying.
Thanks.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem
, but
not the normality of raw scores. So does it help at all to use robust
regression in this situation. Any help will be appreciated.
Go ahead and do it if you want.
If someone asks (or even if they don't), you can tell
them that robust regression gives exactly the same result.
--
Rich Ulrich
On 27 Feb 2002 14:14:44 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dennis Roberts) wrote:
At 04:11 PM 2/27/02 -0500, Rich Ulrich wrote:
Categorizing the values into a few categories labeled,
none, almost none, is one way to convert your scores.
If those labels do make sense.
well, if 750 has
.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at
http
2 1 3 4 5 7 6 8 9 12 11 13 10 15 14 16 17 19 18 20 Japan
end data.
execute.
flipnewnames= judge.
formats russia to japan(F2.0).
listall.
subtitle'Spearman' is the Pearson corr.
compute ranked= $casenum.
nonpar corr vars= russia to japan ranked /print=both.
--
Rich
be different
from detecting lines.
As I wrote before ,
So there is an infinite variety of tests conceivable.
So the *useful* test is the one that avoids 'Bonferroni correction,
because it is the one you perform because
you have some reason for it.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http
yourself a failing grade -- based on guilt-feelings rather
than on data -- and change the limits without ever
testing whether there is a real problem.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
le.
So the *useful* test is the one that avoids 'Bonferroni correction,
because it is the one you perform because
you have some reason for it.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Inst
) with
ANOVA vara by grps(1,4) with covar/
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives
R^2 of 2% -- so I am sure they don't represent *that*
relationship in a proper way.
My tentative conclusion is that your 2% effect really
is a small one; it should be difficult to discern among
likely artifacts; and therefore, it is hardly worth mentioning
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL
of matrices, so you know when it is, that
you want to get an eigenvector; and what to do with it.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about
deviation is the standard deviation of the sample.
We say that the standard deviation of the sample *mean*
will be frequently referred to as the standard error; and
The SD of the mean [or the SE] equals SD/sqrt(N).
That is confusing enough.
I hope this makes your sources clear.
--
Rich
is not reliable or robust for 'superiority.'
You can compute some Robust tests, such as the 2x2 contingency
test, which may be based on median split or whatever split meets
your needs.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
'exact procedures' that may
have been designed for unequal N, generically.)
Personally, I try to do important tests and avoid Bonferroni.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions
usually are not).
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available
told us before,
you don't appreciate hypothesis testing ...
I thought you could not think of cases where doing
*any* F-test helps us.
[ ... ]
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions
://franz.stat.wisc.edu/~rossini/courses/intro-nonpar/text/Specifications_for_the_Ansari_Bradley_Test.html
I suggest repeating the search. That also eliminates the pasting
problem if your reader has broken the long URL into two lines.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
.
Or look in the same section of the library as KS;
or whatever sources you have liked before.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about
of particular references for what I have been
talking about, but unbalanced data might help your search.
And you could try us with more detail, if you wish.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
is available.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available
to start from scratch.
Can you re-import your data from Excel? That sounds safe,
even if you create it in Excel by exporting from 4.0.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions
for
'confounding' or 'masking'; and there might be something
more in my own stats-faq.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about
in genetic model ling -- makes me think of
something I saw years ago, called 'perturbation analyses'.
Try Google, or try us again with additional detail.
Hope this helps.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
its zero-order beta.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available
).
There were only 67 for statistics practice problems,
some of them designed for a particular class's test.
Quick inspection shows that the latter two words should be
promising. statistics practice problems nets 7420, so
you might be able to select topics within those.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL
Postmaster,
Would you please tell your User that they have to
stop sending their daily message to Usenet Newsgroups.
Below are the headers, and the contents of what was
received today, at sci.stat.edu.
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
== headers and message (raw plus HTML plus encoded)
Path
On Thu, 31 Jan 2002 10:37:13 -0500, Rich Ulrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Postmaster,
Would you please tell your User that they have to
stop sending their daily message to Usenet Newsgroups.
Below are the headers, and the contents of what was
received today, at sci.stat.edu.
Rich
,
for any measure of accuracy.
I think I would find it interesting to see some Monte Carlo
experiments. I think those should start with specific classes
of distributions, and specific ranges for their parameters, and
plot their 'accuracies' against the observed skewness
and kurtosis.
--
Rich Ulrich
several derived factors. (For a set
of items where many items were new and untested, it can
be appropriate to discard some of items -- where the loadings
were split, or were always small.) Each factor is scored as
the average score for of a subset of items.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECT
by 5% or 10% reportedly works well for your
measures of 'central tendency', so long as you *know*
that the extremes are not important.
I don't know what it is that you refer to as 'enterprise data.'
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
you have.
If you have more question, copy some output for us;
send some set-up lines; and mention what program.
Also, you posted many, many lines of HTML;
please turn off that option if you can figure out how.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
On 18 Jan 2002 16:55:11 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wuzzy) wrote:
Rich Ulrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
Thanks Rich, most informative, I am trying to determine a method of
comparing apples to oranges - it seems an improtant thing to try to
do, perhaps it is impossible .
Well, I do
of a regression statistic that directly tells me that;
maybe I should create one.)
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem
test, but
I am not sure whether it would fit.)
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES
(A) + Var(B)for A,B independent;
and
Var(kA) = k^2 Var(A)
Right? The SE is the SD of the mean,
so you have the terms you need.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions
the statement when it appears.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available
comparison of link functions sounds familiar, for instance.
Here is one link I found by searching on
BIC information criterion ,
http://www.saam.com/faq/saam2/right.html
(I keep forgetting how to spell AKAIKE.)
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
confusing, borrow a book or two on
experimental design and spend time on the earliest chapters.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about
this helps.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available
for
normality when you compare correlations across a range of
deviant samples. I don't remember its analog being used
for testing between theoretical CDFs; and I suspect it is inferior
to other approaches for (say) strongly skewed distributions.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu
of people who
answer questions in the stat-groups, and look for references and
links to references.
Hope this helps.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving
journal produced by ETS
when I was looking up references for scaling, a year or so ago.
But I don't remember that for a fact.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining
On Thu, 10 Jan 2002 12:00:06 +0100, Jos Jansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rich Ulrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
On Wed, 09 Jan 2002 08:33:41 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Jukka Sinisalo) wrote:
We have two pots with 25 pla
it seemed in the news item) concluded
that Winners should go on to be more successful... but die younger.
And further speculation. My interest faded before I looked it all up.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
-transform, the CIs are never improper.
The logit is log( p/(1-p) )
You can't compute LOG if the survivorship is ever 0 or 100%.
Folks usually plug in 0.5 for 0 cases when that happens.
(Starting with 25 plants, plug in 2% or 98% for 0 or 100%.)
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http
% of all
errors were one kind, so you were trying to bring that one
sort down.
Hope this helps.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks
case??
...
Other that statistical?
- Being familiar; being logically inherent; being brief...
Occam's razor goes something like this,
Do not unnecessarily multiply entities in an explanation.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
On Sun, 30 Dec 2001 18:07:16 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stan Brown)
wrote:
Rich Ulrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in sci.stat.edu:
[ ... ]
RUWe should
not overlook the chance to teach our budding statisticians:
*Always* pay attention to the distinction between random trials
or careful
for any enlightenment.
(If you send me an e-mail copy of a public follow-up, please let me
know that it's a copy so I know to reply publicly.)
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions
appeals most to you.
The D-W test is awkward enough to *test* that you don't wonder
why people should look for an easier option. Several textbooks
that I just looked at seem to be satisfied with recommending
that you eye-ball your residuals in several plots - without doing
tests.
--
Ric
categories,
and choose the few that matter to themselves.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE
search on generalized gaussian;
so, you can probably find others.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE
. And investigators looked.
I'm sorry, but this post reads to me like a pandering
to hostile paranoia, and that annoys me; so I won't
say anything more.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
describe one cell's contribution versus the others.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES
they are sliding away from lifetime
employment, etc., I wonder if the educational system is
becoming more flexible and technocratic, too. Are our systems
converging?
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
is known, so the test statistic has the shorter tails.
(It works for ranks when you don't have ties.)
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks
do you happen to have data like these?
- If there is a Why, you need to find out Why;
else, you want to educate them to do better next time.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions
Just in case someone is interested in the Harvard instance
that I mentioned -- while you might get the article from a newsstand
or a friend --
On Sun, 02 Dec 2001 19:19:38 -0500, Rich Ulrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
[ ... ]
Now, in the NY Times, just a week or two ago. The
dean
On Tue, 04 Dec 2001 17:39:53 GMT, Jerry Dallal
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rich Ulrich wrote:
[ ... ]
I don't see much difference. Identifying predictors by regression
analyses -- what is that advice supposed to mean? The criticisms
of stepwise selection say that it gives you
implies causation
- intuitively, or
- naively, or
- in the weak sense.
(I admit it -- I see a sexy correlation and
'implications' cross my mind.)
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
; that was (after all) a partial-beta.
What am I missing?
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE
On Mon, 03 Dec 2001 20:57:33 GMT, Jerry Dallal
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rich Ulrich wrote:
On 2 Dec 2001 16:49:25 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin C. Heslin)
wrote:
Jenny -- here's a way to impute continuous variables using SAS:
Regression analysis is performed on a continuous
that you need to make decisions about).
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available
- until significant predictors of the continuous variable are
identified.
That does limit the exercise to being strictly exploratory.
You can see my stats-FAQ (or groups.google search)
for criticisms of stepwise selection.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib
On Sat, 1 Dec 2001 08:20:45 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stan Brown)
wrote:
[cc'd to previous poster]
Rich Ulrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in sci.stat.edu:
I think I could not blame students for floundering about on this one.
On Thu, 29 Nov 2001 14:39:35 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stan Brown
as effective for 90% of the people.
I wondered if the asterisk was supposed to represent [sic].
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
?
Have you tried the 2nd Edition of Cohen's book (1989 or 90)
on power analysis? (The 1st and Revised editions
don't have the final chapter or two.)
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
independent z variates
is chi squared with S degrees of freedom.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE
, Mann-Whitney is not a good alternative
(assumes symmetric distrib.), right?
[ ... ]
It assumes *same* distributions in two samples, not necessarily
symmetric. What is your hypothesis going to be? What can you
fairly conclude, if one sample occupies both ends of the distribution?
--
Rich
On Thu, 29 Nov 2001 14:37:14 -0400, Gus Gassmann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rich Ulrich wrote:
On Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:48:48 +0300, Ludovic Duponchel
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If x values have a normal distribution, is there a normal distribution
for x^2 ?
If z is standard normal
.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=
scanned
textbooks in search of errors like those, but I hardly ever find any.
Gross mis-statements tend to be in handbooks and in
(unfortunate) interpretative articles by non-statisticians.
(Can you cite chapter and verse?)
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib
finally achieved a p-value, and wonder what to do next.
(Actually, I don't have a quick opinion, but I thought
Promoting Tests was a good way to pull Dennis's leg.)
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
.
[ ... ]
=== end of 1998 citation
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available
suspect that data, as stated, leave out
some conventional standardization, and so the observed
correlations are mainly artifacts.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining
-abstracts.html
The Best Test for Interaction in Factorial ANOVA and ANCOVA
Todd C. Headrick and Shlomo S. Sawilowsky
Wayne State University
I wonder... Isn't an education, these days, supposed
to develop the ability to go online and search for topics like these?
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http
the standard deviation is increased. But this
is a silly problem to me because I don't make any sense
out of 'standard deviation.'
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining
.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=
is a sizable
correction, someone needs to speak carefully about the 'range.'
To put it another way: If all the cases all are observed at
the same value, and it matters, then the audience really
does deserve to hear the details.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
my impression (from google) that CA is more popular
in European journals than in the US, so there might be better
sites out there in a language I don't read.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
. How variable is this group?
How extreme is this group and sample (if it is a clinical trial)?
A small N is especially problematic, since you do want
to show how narrowly (or not) it was selected.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
27, 2001, Jez Hill.
Subject: Re: [Q ] transforming binomial proportions
Newsgroups: sci.stat.math
Rich Ulrich wrote in article
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The fixed variance was the main appeal of the approximation,
arcsin(sqrt(p)). [snip]
A more accurate transformation for small n has been tabulated
that is ordinarily additive.
I have not seen many texts that tackle transformations in
the abstract. Finney's classic text on bioassay has a few pages.
Or, I think, Mosteller and Tukey, Data Analysis and Regression.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
by me (a native speaker of English),
If K and L are *any* two primes, and S is any even number,
it is true that S = K+L .
That is true for arithmetic-modulo-2. Otherwise, not.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
opinion.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http
.
with detailed solutions descriptions ... Since English is
not his native language, perhaps his degree *is* one degree
that included all four.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions
your marginals are *not* both fixed.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available
,
for a few hundred years. A lot of people know what
statistical power is, and there is no controversy as to
shape of the general topic. So you need a more specific question.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=
-- end message
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
problematic word. Another problem is that
you seem to ask about all research, in all of the world
It might be a clever way to attack 'sample size', but I think
that hasn't been done.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
percentage, I often
find it easier to think of the number-of-instances. One
percent of 4000 is 40. What is the accuracy with 40 seen
in the sample? (95% CI is wider than 30 to 50, but not by
a whole lot.)
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
that your means will not
be normal, or be very useful compared to some other description.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
accounts for some placebo effect,
I'm afraid that
I think that
it happens that
he was wrong about the particular article on Placebo-effect --
if that is the one that we discussed a few months ago.
- see my other response today on this thread
(which I intend to write, immediately).
--
Rich Ulrich
tests (like the
MWW), and (b) simple t-tests, etc., on the rank-transformations.
Robert waffles by saying 'most' purposes, so I have to
find it easy to agree. When might you *not* treat a uniform,
N=20 as normal? - perhaps when the R^2 is too high
(above .90)?
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL
numbers.
Um.
A sample of 100 from a population of 100 is going to
give you the entire population.
Um^2. Only if you sample without replacement.
Probably:
google for bootstrap macro stat-program .
I know there are examples for SPSS and SAS.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED
.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http
- about the citation; and some musing.
On 19 Sep 2001 18:11:59 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (dennis roberts) wrote:
At 05:14 PM 9/19/01 -0400, Rich Ulrich wrote:
It has Likert's original observations on writing
an attitude scale (1932, which I had not seen elsewhere).
dmr
likert's work
As I was saying a few days ago -
On Sun, 16 Sep 2001 17:37:55 -0400, Rich Ulrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
[ ... ]
It is often useful to read what is published in several
textbooks. Sometimes old textbooks have as much
to say as new textbooks do, if the old ones don't
assume so many answers
in statistics beyond their understanding
of math? Ph.D. psychologists. (And many economists,
but they are not relevant here.) It's those PhD psychologists
who *I* would expect to cavalierly misunderstand, mis-state,
or misuse regression to the mean, in either direction.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL
1 - 100 of 402 matches
Mail list logo
