Hi
On 23 Jan 2002, Sangdon Lee wrote:
> I have one Y and two Xs (X1 and X2), and am trying to perform multiple
> linear regression. All Xs and Y variables are standardized (zero mean
> and unit variance). X1 and X2 are moderately correlated (r=0.6) and
> the correlation of X1 and X2 to Y is -0.
That is the most amusing post I have seen here in quite a while. Thanks,
Steven.
PS -- I have a virtual snippet of Steven Lee's hair and a voodoo doll in his
likeness. All those $50 payments should be wired to me or Steven will find
himself having sharp pains with no apparent cause. ;-)
- O
On 23 Jan 2002 07:52:49 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Granaas) wrote:
[ snip ]
>
> ... Their
> goal was then to test whether the pattern of endorsements was indeed
>
> # item 1 > # item 2 > # item 3 > # item 4 > # item 5
>
> where "# item 1
Greetings!
I have one Y and two Xs (X1 and X2), and am trying to perform multiple
linear regression. All Xs and Y variables are standardized (zero mean
and unit variance). X1 and X2 are moderately correlated (r=0.6) and
the correlation of X1 and X2 to Y is -0.2 and 0.3, respectively.
ANOVA sho
I’ve been trying to figure out how to use Markov Chain Monte
Carlo for Bayesian analysis and there is (at least) one aspect that
I’m not getting. Basically, I’m not sure how variances are
optimized.
To use a simple example (for which an analytic solution exists),
let’s use a linear slope (b) forc
Yes, I do believe that it helps.
Thanks,
Michael
On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Art Kendall wrote:
> this seems to be an example of "Guttman scaling" There is no longer a
> procedure with that name in SPSS. But posting a message there might reach
> old-time psychometric people and then to software.
>
Chris wrote:
>
> I don't know how many of you already noticed the rather humorous story on
> the "Effect of remote, retroactive intercessory prayer on..." in the always
> somewhat tongue-in-cheek last-of-the-year-issue of the BMJ.
> If not, you may find it worth having a look at.
> http://bmj.c
