> On 03 Jun 2015, at 22:05 , Erica Cseko Nolasco wrote:
>
> I tried using TRUE instead T, but it gave me the same error. (Script on the
> bottom)
> I really want a paired test and it seems to give me as we can see on the
> following matrix.
> No idea what is happening
>
I get the impression
I tried using TRUE instead T, but it gave me the same error. (Script on the
bottom)
I really want a paired test and it seems to give me as we can see on the
following matrix.
No idea what is happening
> pairwise.t.test(x = data$tss,data$pa,p.adjust.method =
'bonferroni',paired=TRUE)
Error in compl
> On 03 Jun 2015, at 19:14 , Erica Cseko Nolasco wrote:
>
> Thanks Jim,
>
> I removed the corresponding cases and tried again. What I discovery now is
> if I run the function without paired = T (pairwise.t.test(x =
> data$tss,data$pa) is works. However, if I add the paired = T
> (pairwise.t.tes
Just to be on the safe side, what is T? It is recommended to use TRUE in
case you set T to something else. I think this is very unlikely to solve
the problem but it is worth trying.
On 03/06/2015 18:14, Erica Cseko Nolasco wrote:
Thanks Jim,
I removed the corresponding cases and tried again.
Thanks Jim,
I removed the corresponding cases and tried again. What I discovery now is
if I run the function without paired = T (pairwise.t.test(x =
data$tss,data$pa) is works. However, if I add the paired = T
(pairwise.t.test(x = data$tss,data$pa,paired = T) is gives me the error ' Error
in compl
Hi Erica,
The problem may be that you are specifying a grouping factor (mdl) in
which the group sizes are unequal. If one case in group "tot" is
missing, is it possible to identify the corresponding cases in the
other factor levels and delete them?
Jim
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:59 PM, Erica Csek
Dear listers,
I'm performing a PERMANOVA (adonis{vegan}) to compare the results (ROC,
TSS) of models based on two factors (model, algo). I was not able to find a
pairwise test for adonis, on PRIMER it would be a Tukey test. Though, I
chose to perform a pairwise.t.test what would be quite simple. H
Thank you!
From: peter dalgaard [pda...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 12:05 PM
To: Thomas Chesney
Cc: r-help@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R] pairwise.t.test
On 10 Feb 2015, at 11:45 , Thomas Chesney
wrote:
> I'm using pairwise.t.tes
On 10 Feb 2015, at 11:45 , Thomas Chesney
wrote:
> I'm using pairwise.t.test() with 6 groups, but the dataset the 6 groups are
> in actually contains 24 groups.
>
> When I run the test with all 24 groups the results I'm getting between Group
> 1 and Group 2 are very different from the result
I'm using pairwise.t.test() with 6 groups, but the dataset the 6 groups are in
actually contains 24 groups.
When I run the test with all 24 groups the results I'm getting between Group 1
and Group 2 are very different from the results I'm getting between Group 1 and
Group 2 when I split off the
Thanks a lot, Peter. Excellent book btw.
Jab
--- On Fri, 10/9/10, peter dalgaard wrote:
From: peter dalgaard
Subject: Re: [R] pairwise.t.test vs t.test
To: "Jabez Wilson"
Cc: "R-Help"
Date: Friday, 10 September, 2010, 15:20
On Sep 10, 2010, at 16:01 , Jabez Wilson w
On Sep 10, 2010, at 9:01 AM, Jabez Wilson wrote:
> Dear all, I am perplexed when trying to get the same results using
> pairwise.t.test and t.test.
> I'm using examples in the ISwR library,
>> attach(red.cell.folate)
> I can get the same result for pairwise.t.test and t.test when I set the
> v
On Sep 10, 2010, at 16:01 , Jabez Wilson wrote:
> Dear all, I am perplexed when trying to get the same results using
> pairwise.t.test and t.test.
> I'm using examples in the ISwR library,
>> attach(red.cell.folate)
> I can get the same result for pairwise.t.test and t.test when I set the
> va
Dear all, I am perplexed when trying to get the same results using
pairwise.t.test and t.test.
I'm using examples in the ISwR library,
>attach(red.cell.folate)
I can get the same result for pairwise.t.test and t.test when I set the
variances to be non-equal, but not when they are assumed to be e
Peter Dalgaard wrote:
> Michael A. Miller wrote:
>
>>> "Peter" == Peter Dalgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>
>>>
>> > (Oddly enough, this issue hasn't come up in the 6+ years
>> > that the function has existed, and then it pops up twice
>>
Michael A. Miller wrote:
>> "Peter" == Peter Dalgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>
> > (Oddly enough, this issue hasn't come up in the 6+ years
> > that the function has existed, and then it pops up twice
> > with little over a week between, see the thread start
> "Peter" == Peter Dalgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (Oddly enough, this issue hasn't come up in the 6+ years
> that the function has existed, and then it pops up twice
> with little over a week between, see the thread started by
> James Root on March 26.)
Odd indeed - th
francogrex wrote:
>
> ...
> I have no indication that the test is taking into account that the data
> are paired! Is it possible to do a pairwise t test with adjustement for
> multiple comparisons using pairwise.t.test? If not any other function for
> that? Thanks.
>
Dear all, Peter Dalgaard h
francogrex wrote:
> Dear R-help, I have a question about pairwise.t.test and adjustment for
> multiple comparisons for paired data points.
> I have the following data:
>
> n=c("x", "x", "x", "x", "x", "x", "x", "x", "x", "x", "y", "y",
> "y", "y", "y", "y", "y", "y", "y", "y", "z", "z", "z", "z",
Dear R-help, I have a question about pairwise.t.test and adjustment for
multiple comparisons for paired data points.
I have the following data:
n=c("x", "x", "x", "x", "x", "x", "x", "x", "x", "x", "y", "y",
"y", "y", "y", "y", "y", "y", "y", "y", "z", "z", "z", "z", "z",
"z", "z", "z", "z", "z
20 matches
Mail list logo
