Friedman Test in JASP

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ม.ค. 2025

ความคิดเห็น • 13

  • @haroldasraz
    @haroldasraz 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    This video made everything really easy to understand. Already, manged to download JASP and apply here learned knowledge. Cheers.

  • @jonathanrhodes2076
    @jonathanrhodes2076 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Awesome, clear, and concise. Learning to use JASP and this was 10 minutes well spent. Thank you.

  • @TaylorJones-st7qm
    @TaylorJones-st7qm 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    what citation can i use for the kendalls w thresholds, you mentioned in the video that there are lots of papers, however i cannot find any with specific thresholds that i can refernce. im talking about the 0.1 (small), 0.3 (moderate effect), 0.5 (strong)

  • @mathusaymathtutorial935
    @mathusaymathtutorial935 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thank you Sir!
    I would like to ask what is the difference between Connover Post hoc test and Post hoc test? which one should I use if I am comparing three related groups? Thanks!

    • @DrPC_statistics_guides
      @DrPC_statistics_guides  ปีที่แล้ว +1

      A conover test is still a post hoc test but is used with nonparametric data

  • @naninoah1977
    @naninoah1977 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    You're a legend

  • @ERFL1988
    @ERFL1988 ปีที่แล้ว

    Hi Paul! Many thanks for your great video. However, I would like to ask you, how could I determine the effect size for every pair comparison (pos hoc). Thanks again. Best, Enzo.

    • @jamanaaron
      @jamanaaron ปีที่แล้ว

      Have the same issue here. Did you find any solutions to determine pairwise effect size in Firedman test in JASP?

  • @tmk604
    @tmk604 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    So for example if I'm comparing values that happened over time, let's say over 5 weeks. Should I use the corrected p values as there are 10 comparisons in total?

    • @DrPC_statistics_guides
      @DrPC_statistics_guides  4 ปีที่แล้ว

      There's no hard rule over that- you reduce chances of a false positive (due to multiple testing) if you do. However, you may increase your chance of a false negative. If you do the corrected p values you are erring on the side of caution.

    • @tmk604
      @tmk604 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@DrPC_statistics_guides and I have only 5 subjects in each group (2 groups). As an example, friedman shows me a large sig. diff. (p=0.003) and if I use the corrected p values I might have 1 sig diff between all 10 comparisons. Is this right or in this case I shouldn't use the corrected p values?
      Thank you.

  • @davidgodefroid3783
    @davidgodefroid3783 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you very much!