Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Supported by

Bayesian RM ANCOVA: no evidence for interaction but simple slope analyses indicates interaction

spispi
edited May 2017 in JASP & BayesFactor

My model is a 2-level repeated within-subject factor (Repeated), a between-subject factor (Condition) and a covariate (Difference). Basically I want to look at the effects of Condition and Difference on the performances in 2 variants of a task (Repeat 1 and Repeated 2). I expect the effects to be different across the 2 variants.

When I ran a Bayesian RM ANCOVA in JASP all seems to make sense, except for that there was strong evidence against the interaction between Difference and Repeated.

The thing is when I plot the data I could see there's difference between the two lines. So I ran two separate Bayesian linear regressions to double-check. And indeed:
There's no effect of Difference on Repeated 1.
But there's an effect of Difference on Repeated 2.
My question is then: why did I find that there's no evidence for the interaction between Difference and Repeated in the RM ANCOVA?

Thank you for your help in advance!

Comments

  • Hi Spi,

    This is my take on the issue: interactions are inherently complex --they can take on all kinds of shapes-- and this means that they spread their predictions out relatively widely; this entails a relatively strong penalty for complexity. Moreover, the evidence from the separate linear regressions is not overwhelming (Jeffreys would call is "not worth more than a bare mention" in both cases).

    We are working to implement contrasts, and these ought to allow you to specify your expectations more precisely, so that there's less of a penalty for complexity. But it may take a while before we're perfectly happy with our solution.

    Cheers,
    E.J.

Sign In or Register to comment.