Incongruency - Main effects vs Post Hoc comparisons
I am using the last version of JASP and I am a bit confused by a result. Let's say I run a repeated measures ANOVA with a 2 level within-subject factor. This effect is not significant (Tone - See print screen). However, if I run within the same ANOVA a posthoc test on the main effect of Tone, I found a highly significant effect, while, If I am right, in theory I should find highly simi
lar effects. If I remove the covariate, then results are more congruent, but it looks like the post hoc tests take into account the covariate since the values are changing. So I am not sure why the results are so different. The Bayesian post hoc seem to largely agrees with the frequentist post hoc (attached as well).
I have tried with 3 different results, and I always obtain the same "incongruency" between main effects and post hoc tests, at least when there is a covariate.
I was also wondering if there was a possibility to have the descriptives for contrasts or post hoc tests, because at the moment it only display a difference.