Bayesian RM ANOVA: Interpretation of interaction model and BFs that are "anecdotal"
I just started working with JASP and have some problems with interpreting the output of the Bayesian RM ANOVA. Any help would be greatly appreciated
In my current experiment I tested two groups of participants. I'm using the BF to check whether there is a difference between two of my conditions. If there is no difference I would like to collapse across these two conditions.
I did a Bayesian RM Anova with Group (Group 1 & 2) as between factor and Condition (Level A & as within factor. Now I think I should look at the interaction model (right?). I read in one of the previous posts (http://www.cogsci.nl/forum/index.php?p=/discussion/1716/interpretation-of-bayes-repeated-mesures-anova/p1) that I would have to divide the BF10 for the model including the two main effects by the BF10 for the model including the main effects and the interaction to isolate the interaction and see what it adds to the model. For my data that results in 2.1. Now I'm a bit confused as to what that means? It looks like including any of the factors does not really add anything to explain the data (all BFs < 1). How can the value for the isolated interaction be 2? Also none of the BFs is under 0.3 and therefore it's only "anecdotal" evidence for the null. I'm not sure what to make of that? Can I collapse across my conditions or not? Or is it just up to me whether I do?
Thanks for any help in advance. I really appreciate it!