I've had occasion to talk with a number of educator types lately, at different
application and responsibility levels of primary & secondary Ed.
Only one recalled the term, regression toward the mean. Some (granted,
the less analytically minded) vehemently denied that such could be causing
the r
Ronald Bloom wrote:
>
> In sci.stat.consult Elliot Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In sci.stat.consult Ronald Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Herman as usual is absolutely correct; the validity of the Fisher test is
> > analagous to the validity of regression tests which are derived
>
On Thu, 10 May 2001, Magill, Brett wrote, inter alia:
> How should these data be analyzed? The difficulty is that the data
> are cross level. Not the traditional multi-level model however.
Hi, Brett. I don't understand this statement. Looks to me like an
obvious place to apply multilevel
>Subject: Re: (none)
>From: Rich Ulrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: 5/10/2001 5:15 PM Eastern
CH: " Why do articles appear in print when study methods, analyses,
>results, and conclusions are somewhat faulty?"
>
> - I suspect it might be a consequence of "Sturgeon's Law,"
>named after the science
I have a sample set of series of state-changes/events/behaviors, from this
sample I'd like to generalize a scoring method for the likelihood of a
criterion behavior on other data sets.
Could someone guide me to the appropriate statistical technique for this
type of problem and any useful resources
In sci.stat.edu Ronald Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It has become the custom, in epidemiological reports
> to use always the hypergeometric inference test --
> The Fisher Exact Test -- when treating 2x2 tables
> arising from all manner of experimental setups -- e.g.
Only for tables with s
this is not unlike having scores for students in a class ... one score for
each student and ... the age of the teacher of THOSE students ... for a
class ... scores will vary but, age for the teacher remains the same ...
but the age might be different in ANother class with a different teacher
.
In sci.stat.consult Ronald Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Herman as usual is absolutely correct; the validity of the Fisher test is
analagous to the validity of regression tests which are derived
conditional on x but, since the distribution does not involve x, are valid
unconditionally even if t
- I offer a suggestion of a reference.
On 10 May 2001 17:25:36 GMT, Ronald Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[ snip, much detail ]
> It has become the custom, in epidemiological reports
> to use always the hypergeometric inference test --
> The Fisher Exact Test -- when treating 2x2 tables
>
In sci.stat.consult Elliot Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In sci.stat.consult Ronald Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Herman as usual is absolutely correct; the validity of the Fisher test is
> analagous to the validity of regression tests which are derived
> conditional on x but, since the
- selecting from CH's article, and re-formatting. I don't know if
I am agreeing, disagreeing, or just rambling on.
On 4 May 2001 10:15:23 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Carl Huberty)
wrote:
CH: " Why do articles appear in print when study methods, analyses,
results, and conclusions are somewhat
A colleague has a data set with a structure like the one below:
ID X1 X2 Y
1 1 0.700.40
2 1 0.800.40
3 1 0.650.40
4 2 1.200.25
5 2 1.100.25
6 3 0.900.30
7 4 0.500.50
8
In sci.stat.edu Herman Rubin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Each one of these probability setups 1-3 gives rise to a somewhat
>>different small-sample inferential test. In particular,
>>the schemes (1),(2),(3) give rise to distributions conditioned
>>on 3, 2, and 1 fixed parameters respectively.
In article <9deiug$l0h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Ronald Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Significance tests for 2x2 tables require that the single observed
>table be regarded as if it were, (under the null hypothesis of
>"uniformity" or "independence") but a single instance drawn at
>random from a
Significance tests for 2x2 tables require that the single observed
table be regarded as if it were, (under the null hypothesis of
"uniformity" or "independence") but a single instance drawn at
random from a universe of replicates. Insofar as there are at
least three well-known distinct such
15 matches
Mail list logo
