Have some more survey data. 4 dichotomous variables involving a deadly
force survey, so vars like resist arrest or not, felony or not, death or
not. And my haunting 7-point Likert scale of Reasonable to really
Unreasonable use of deadly force.
Now it gets worse. The person who designed the st
Robert J. MacG. Dawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: If I attempt to survey 1000 people and 950 answer, of whom 600 give a
: positive response, I can consider the extremes of 650 in 1000 and 600
: in 1000, create confidence intervals, and say (eg) that _in_any_case_
Don't follow this. Why
In doing a factorial survey, the first 70 or so respondents used a very
narrow range of the 1 to 7 Likert scale, mostly 6's and 7's, seldom going
below 5.
This pilot study is using students who agree to fill out a 15 minute
survey.
What would you suggest to discern a very narrow range, where m
Have data from survey that is 2 different setups.
One is from dBASE and is in the form:
Respondent1 Var1(Hi/Lo) Var2(Hi/Lo) Var3(Hi/Lo) Val1(1 to 7 Likert scale)
Respondent1 Var1Var2Var3Val2(different scenario)
Respondent1 Var1Var2Var3Val3
so one
What would be the simplest and solid way to generate random numbers from
1 to 16 only?
I don't have any compilers or languages handy except for an APL
interpreter that's quite old but still powerful and BASIC that comes with
the DOS operating system.
I gather there must be some code to do a s
If the following factorial survey was performed:
192 dimensions with 200 respondents answering 10 vignettes each.
So, each vignette would have about 10 responses.
The problem is that the dimensions were not randomized on the vignettes.
If there were correlations between some of the dimensions, th
