RM ANOVA frequentist/bayesian: opposite conclusion ?

Comments

• andersony3k

  September 2023 edited September 2023

  While there could be an error in the Bayesian repeated measures routine, here's another possibility: It's known that JASP's "Bayesian repeated measures" routine doesn't actually perform a repeated measures analysis. Instead, it performs a linear mixed effects analysis (but with dropping of participants who have any missing data). This is significant because, especially when there are multiple factors in the analysis, a linear mixed effects model won't necessarily produce the same result as a repeated measures ANOVA. So I think that if you want to compare frequentist to Bayesian results you might want to restructure your data to long format and then compare a Classical Linear Mixed Effects model to a Bayesian Linear Mixed Effects model.

  R
• EJ

  September 2023

  Also:

  1. The discrepancy is not glaring; the BF indicates anecdotal evidence, whereas the p-value is near .03, which is not that compelling
  2. The inclusion BF is based on taking all models into account, which is fundamentally different from the frequentist approach.

  EJ
• johan_achard

  October 2023

  Thanks for the explanation, for your expertise and your help.

  It's clearer now.

  Johan

  Johan A. ACHARD

  PhD Student in Cognitive Sciences

  Université Franche-Comté