age-
> From: Mike Wogan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 2:16 PM
> To: Luv 2 muah 143
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: could someone help me with this intro to stat. problem
>
>
> On 8 Dec 1999, Luv 2 muah 143 wrote:
>
> > 5 of
On 8 Dec 1999 15:53:34 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Magill, Brett)
wrote:
> Mike,
>
> With randomization pre, it is not necessary to take a pre-intervention
> measurement. Test the difference in confidence following the training. If
> it is significant, there is a difference. Decide what directio
There was an interesting comment on this thread - assessing post-test
measures following training - on the list last night. Sorry, but I've
deleted the message and I don't remember who the author was. The comments
were:
the subjects aren't blind to which condition they're in, which
introduce
On Wed, 8 Dec 1999, Mike Wogan wrote:
> Donald,
>
> I'm a firm believer in the effects of Maxwell's Demon.
>
> Mike
Ah. That explains it!
-- Don.
Donald F. Burrill
On Wed, 8 Dec 1999, Joe Ward wrote, in response to part of my reply to
Mike Wogan:
MW> If there is a pre-post measurement of self-confidence, then you need a
MW> mixed model Anova, with Training vs. No Training as the between groups
MW> factor and Pre-Post as the within groups factor.
>
DB> Th
Donald,
I'm a firm believer in the effects of Maxwell's Demon.
Mike
- Original Message -
From: Donald F. Burrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Mike Wogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Luv 2 muah 143 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: could someone help me with this intro to sta
attribution
because of random assignment even without pre-measure.
-Original Message-
From: Mike Wogan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 2:16 PM
To: Luv 2 muah 143
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: could someone help me with this intro to stat. problem
On 8 Dec 1999
>On 8 Dec 1999, Luv 2 muah 143 wrote:
>
>> 5 of 10 volunteers are randomly selected to receive self-defense training.
>> The other 5 receive no training. At the end of the training period, all
>> subjects complete a self-confidence questionnaire.
>>
>> a.) Is there a difference in self-con
Mike Wogan writes --
- Original Message -
From: Mike Wogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Luv 2 muah 143 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 11:16 AM
Subject: Re: could someone help me with this intro to stat. problem
| On
On Wed, 8 Dec 1999, Mike Wogan wrote, in response to Luv 2 muah 143's
question:
> > 5 of 10 volunteers are randomly selected to receive self-defense
> > training. The other 5 receive no training. At the end of the
> > training period, all subjects complete a self-confidence
> > questionnair
On 8 Dec 1999, Luv 2 muah 143 wrote:
> 5 of 10 volunteers are randomly selected to receive self-defense training. The
> other 5 receive no training. At the end of the training period, all subjects
> complete a self-confidence questionnaire.
>
> a.) Is there a difference in self-confidence b
5 of 10 volunteers are randomly selected to receive self-defense training. The
other 5 receive no training. At the end of the training period, all subjects
complete a self-confidence questionnaire.
a.) Is there a difference in self-confidence between the 2 groups (p<.01)?
b.) What are the
13 matches
Mail list logo
