AugustCollsiöö

Comments

• Yes, I get that! The main confusion and question here is the wording of the alternative hypothesis. Shoudnt it (for a non-directional test) rather read "The distribution of the row-variable is independent from the distribution of the column-v…

  in Alternative hypothesis in Bayesian contigency tables Comment by AugustCollsiöö April 2021
• Dear EJ, No worries. Turns out that I misread the notes and post-hoc testing had not been included for interactions. So my post on the matter has been moved to enhancement. It would be a great inclusion though. Best, August

  in Post-hoc testing for interaction in 2way BANOVA + Effect sizes Comment by AugustCollsiöö February 2020
• Hi E.J, Ok, then my intuition was correct, that it was basically a confidence interval. I seems like a bit of waste to not make intervals from the model, since one then misses one of the perks with bayesian stats (having intervals that makes sense)…

  in Impossible values included in credible interval Comment by AugustCollsiöö February 2020
• in Post-hoc testing for interaction in 2way BANOVA + Effect sizes Comment by AugustCollsiöö January 2020
• I realised that this might be a bug, because when reading the notes I saw that post-hoc testing had been implemented, at least for Mixed-BANOVA - and I don't get the possibility to do that either. I've opened a bug-report on the matter here: https:/…

  in Post-hoc testing for interaction in 2way BANOVA + Effect sizes Comment by AugustCollsiöö January 2020
• Thanks for the quick replies! By including Main1 in the null-model I (kind of) test the models, although now not the full model with Main1, Main2 and the interaction, and against a somewhat different null model. Is such an approach absurd, or could …

  in Positive BF inclusion for interaction but model with interaction not best model Comment by AugustCollsiöö May 2019