EJ
About
- Username
- EJ
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,594
- Last Active
- Roles
- Member, Administrator, Moderator
Comments
-
Oh it's out already I see! EJ
-
Today I hope, maybe tomorrow EJ
-
I'm asking our expert
-
Good that you figured it out...took me a while myself too :-) EJ
-
I have attended our expert to this. In general I think this seems more of an issue for our GitHub page -- if you post the issue there (maybe with a screenshot) then it can be assigned and fixed by a team member. For details see https://jasp-stats.or…
-
This is a serious bug that we are already aware of. A hot-fix is on its way!
-
Yes makes sense. I would add this reference: @ARTICLE{LiangEtAl2008, AUTHOR = {Liang, F. and Paulo, R. and Molina, G. and Clyde, M. A. and Berger, J. O.}, TITLE = {Mixtures of $g$ Priors for {B}ayesian Variable Selection}, JOURNAL = {Jour…
-
This is a tricky issue. Ideally we'd have a BF for a parameter ANOVA model that relaxes the assumption of sphericity; we don't have that yet. If the p-values do not change much, it can be argued that the BF will not change much either... EJ
-
Forwarded to our expert... EJ
-
I think this is an issue for our GitHub page - for details see https://jasp-stats.org/2018/03/29/request-feature-report-bug-jasp/
-
Yes we are working on analysis-specific filters
-
Planned for a future release. You can request/upvote it on our GitHub page. It should work using the BayesFactor package in R.
-
Or something as described here: https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/egydq
-
Difficult to say. Can you share the data or show a screenshot?
-
I'll bring this to the attention of our experts!
-
It could be a feature request on our GitHub page: in the Preferences, we can add an option "Show data preview".
-
Even though I have not found the need to adjust anything, it strikes me as very useful...why would you want it turned off?
-
Can you DM me with your preferred name and email address so we can add you? EJ (EJ.Wagenmakers@gmail.com)
-
Well what frequentist models do also depends on whether you use Type I, II, or III sums of squares. But anyway, I don't think that "across matched models" gives you the best summary of the full model table. EJ
-
Ah yes. I did come across this issue before. As a JASP team member suggested to me, "complex tabulate analysis, in the style of SAS proc tabulate (https://documentation.sas.com/doc/en/pgmsascdc/v_072/proc/n1ql5xnu0k3kdtn11gwa5hc7u435.htm) and …
-
I'll bring this to the attention of our expert.
-
Can you explain the purpose of the module a bit more? JASP already produces what I consider to be publication-ready tables. EJ
-
Can you share the data, kwellstein?
-
My bad, this happens by default and it's mentioned in the model specification!
-
Yes, but they were explicitly added to the null model, which should have happened automatically
-
Dear Kwellstein, This result does look anomalous and I don't really get it immediately. I do see that you added a number of terms to the null model. I am particularly suspicious about the terms "subject" and "random slopes". I wi…
-
There are multiple issues here. First off, predictions are usually made using regression models, not factorial designs. However, there is no principled reason why this would be the case. I think you can do this in our Quality Control module under DO…
-
[I thought I addressed this, but apparently I didn't, so here goes] This is a good question, and I've attended our expert to this! EJ