Re: point biserial formula

2000-10-28 Thread Donald Burrill
On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, dennis roberts wrote: > don ... no wonder students go bananas in statistics ... if we "sink" to > this level of discussion about a formula ... a formula that really has > so little utility ... how much time do we spend on the really important > ones? I would have thought

Re: point biserial formula

2000-10-23 Thread Rich Ulrich
(on the subject of point-biserial correlation) On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 09:57:42 -0400, Art Kendall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Even if the term PBS didn't stick, I would hope that somewhere in a first > course a student would retain the concept that a correlation between gender and > height means

Re: point biserial formula

2000-10-23 Thread Art Kendall
Even if the term PBS didn't stick, I would hope that somewhere in a first course a student would retain the concept that a correlation between gender and height means the same thing as a difference in mean height for the genders. This helps lay the foundation for later realizing that ANOVA is a s

Re: point biserial formula

2000-10-23 Thread dennis roberts
At 12:25 AM 10/23/00 -1000, Daniel Blaine wrote: > I'm not sure what you mean by a "no brainer" since I've > "interpreted your interpretations" to suggest that concepts in > and around parameter estimation and hypothesis testing are not > easy ones for our students

Re: point biserial formula

2000-10-23 Thread Daniel Blaine
On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, dennis roberts wrote: > don ... no wonder students go bananas in statistics ... if we "sink" to > this level of discussion about a formula ... a formula that really has so > little utility ... how much time do we spend on the really important ones? > "(R)eally imp

Re: point biserial formula

2000-10-22 Thread dennis roberts
don ... no wonder students go bananas in statistics ... if we "sink" to this level of discussion about a formula ... a formula that really has so little utility ... how much time do we spend on the really important ones? i would submit that for most intro courses ... where correlation is discu

Re: point biserial formula

2000-10-22 Thread Donald Burrill
On Sat, 21 Oct 2000, dennis roberts wrote: > At 06:14 AM 10/21/00 +, Eric Bohlman wrote: < snip, a couple of quibbles answered by Eric > > >2a) It demonstrates that variations in the relative sizes of the group > >will result in variations in the magnitude of the correlation, even i

Re: point biserial formula

2000-10-21 Thread Eric Bohlman
dennis roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 06:14 AM 10/21/00 +, Eric Bohlman wrote: >> >>1) It demonstrates that a correlation problem in which one variable is >>dichotomous is equivalent to a two-group mean-difference problem. > maybe you can make this point but, to a typical student ...

point biserial formula

2000-10-21 Thread dennis roberts
At 06:14 AM 10/21/00 +, Eric Bohlman wrote: > >1) It demonstrates that a correlation problem in which one variable is >dichotomous is equivalent to a two-group mean-difference problem. maybe you can make this point but, to a typical student ... i would say this equivalence would be lost > >2