EJ
About
 Username
 EJ
 Joined
 Visits
 856
 Last Active
 Roles
 Member, Administrator, Moderator
Comments

Thanks for the graphs and explanations! I hope we will have what you're asking for soon, but we welcome future suggestions for improvement so let us know your thoughts (as I said, it will take a while before we have added this functionality but we'r…

I've asked, hope to learn from the team members soon Cheers, E.J.

Hi Joedoc, So you already have the limits as computed from some other stats program, and then you wish to plot them? I don't think that's possible right now (you could issue a feature request on our GitHub page, for detail see https://jaspstats.org…

I'll ask E.J.

I'll ask what's up with the RM MANOVA...

Right. But as moderation is an interaction, it seems that the problem reduces to specifying an interaction in a SEM model? Cheers, E.J.

Hello Manondmg, This is a technical issue that I advise you to take to our GitHub page, where our Linux expert may be able to help you out. For details see https://jaspstats.org/2018/03/29/requestfeaturereportbugjasp/ Cheers, E.J.

This is strange  I'll make some enquiries E.J.

Hi JP21, Does this help? https://jaspstats.org/2020/03/12/mediationandmoderationanalysisinjasp/ Cheers, E.J.

Hi IBR, I believe you do have fixed effects. If you go to "Additional options" and change the prior width, the BF should change  right? If fact you can just change each of the three scales by an order of magnitude; if the results remain …

Hi Mirna, Definitely the independent multinomial, as you already suggested. Yes, this test should work in JASP. I'm not sure about that note  can you send an example csv and .jasp file? E.J.

Hi Nils, You can first add a 1, and then do the transform. Or you could multiply all values x by a constant c, so that the smallest x gives cx>1; you then have log(cx), which is log(c) + log(x) and the constant should not affect your inference. …

No worries. I'll ask our experts. E.J.

Hi Amy, We are here to help :) If you go to "Preferences" > "Results" you can untick "display exact pvalues". Very small pvalues will then be shown as "<.001". Let me know if it is working for you. …

If you look at the little icons on the bottom right you see that the input pane only accepts ordinal and continuous variables. The measurement level of your variables, in contrast, is deemed to be nominal. If this is not the case you can override th…

Given the data and the uniform prior (and the likelihood), the probability is 95% that mu lies between the lower and upper bound. [I would use mu in order to distinguish between the sample value and the inference] Cheers, E.J.

Hi Rohanp16, I guess it is a little weird to add credible intervals in a "descriptive" table, because the intervals are an inference. These credible intervals are for the group means, under a uniform prior. You can change the priors (under…

That analysis uses the BayesFactor package in R. Have you checked their documentation? Cheers, E.J.

Hi Szymon, Do you mean the Bayesian linear mixed model, or the Bayesian ANOVA? E.J.

I'll attend Richard to your issue (he is busy so may not have time soon  you could email him and let us know here what he says). Cheers, E.J.

Hi Scribe42, In many scenarios, the inference is very robust to the type of prior that is used. The primary Bayesian movement in statistics right now is "objective Bayes" and it uses generalpurpose priors that meet specific desiderata. My…

Hi Scribe42, The priors can be set under "Advanced options" (linear regression) or "additional options" (ANOVA). The default options are not uninformed in the sense that they are not uniform, but they are fairly spread out and ce…

Yes, so the model including Groups get strong support from the data (over the null model). You might want to look at R2 that is not modelaveraged, but based on the model including Groups. Cheers, E.J.

Hi Markus, Can you paste the model table? If the BF supports the inclusion of the group factor than this is what counts. The modelaveraged R2 credible interval informs you about the size of the effect, not about whether it is present or absent  i…

Hi Janina, This is a tricky one! Right now I don't think this can be done in JASP, since the parameter priors for ANOVA are all centered on zero. However, perhaps it is possible to consider a ttest reformulation of the main idea? Cheers, E.J.

Hi Brandt,  Reviewer 2, nice :) This would be a great feature request! (for details see https://jaspstats.org/2018/03/29/requestfeaturereportbugjasp/) In the meantime, I am sure that there is an R package for this...the easiest solution is t…

Indeed, it is as Famondir says. The differences are due to the stochastic nature of the MCMC process. By increasing the number of MCMC iterations this variability can be reduced, but it will never be zero exactly. E.J.

He's trying to finish up his thesis before Jan 1st, but I'm sure it will be his first order of business in the new year :) E.J.

Hi ARF, I do not know why you would want to subsample, but I will take this as a given. One issue is whether the subsamples are partially overlapping, as you'd get from a standard bootstrap approach. If so, this overlap needs to be taken into accoun…

I am pretty sure we offer a complete analysis, but I'll forward this to the experts. Cheers, E.J.