Sign in with your CogSci, Facebook, Google, or Twitter account.

Or register to create a new account.

We'll use your information only for signing in to this forum.

Supported by

Interpretation of RM ANOVA output -> two models are supported

a two-way RM ANOVA with the BF package gave the following output:

If I interpret it correctly, there is anecdotal support for the model with the factor point of measurement and anectodal support for the model with both factors and interaction. What do I do with this? of course, there is not much evidence of an effect. but what do I report? that there is a small effect of point of measurement but at the same time of an interaction with group?
if I look at the ratio of both BFs, 2.01/2.64 = 0.761, there is more support to no difference between the models. Is this correct?

bla2.JPG 32K


  • EJEJ Posts: 459

    The model that is best supported is the full model. However, the evidence over the two-main effects model is not strong. Also, the model with only one main effect is supported almost as much as the full model. Conclusion: more data are needed. You might want to check out the effects analysis too. This summarizes the results across the different models.

  • duplex_duplex_ Posts: 28

    Thanks for the fast reply, EJ!

Sign In or Register to comment.