Interpreting Bayesian rmANOVA posthoc tests
Dear BayesFactor forum,
What I believe to understand is that there is very strong evidence for the Verum vs. Sham model being better than the null model (>650000 more likely). But if that is the case I am not sure what to make of the post-hoc tests. Because there the BF_01U would indicate the opposite, right?
See the plots below for all the info.
I am having trouble interpreting these results. Can you help me please?
Thank you in advance for your help!
Katharina
Comments
The posthoc BF01, U yields 2.804*10^-4, so below 1, which means evidence in favor of H1. So BF10,U= 1/ 2.804*10^-4 = 3566.334 in favor of their being a difference.
EJ
I should have seen that myself... Thank you for your help! :)