EJ
About
- Username
- EJ
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,530
- Last Active
- Roles
- Member, Administrator, Moderator
Comments
-
There is only a single mathematically correct way to update, if the data are judged to be exchangeable. The second blog post referenced above discusses an example where one analyses a data set of 10 observations in two ways: (1) all data at once; (2…
-
I do think the statement "posterior odds = BF times prior odds" is correct; it is just that the calculation of the BF requires some care, that is, you need to update not just your belief in the rival hypotheses but also in the competing pa…
-
For continuous priors you have to specify different distributions. I think that in your case I would just select a normal distribution. You can get the best fitting normal distribution from the previous experiment from the mean and 95% central credi…
-
The multiplication works only for point hypotheses, or when the data of the different experiments are independent (in the sense that knowledge about the one experiment does not affect your expectations about the outcome of the other experiment). Let…
-
Hi Irina, I'm on vacation so cannot really delve into this, but it would be interesting to see how skewed your data really are, and why the log transform does not help. Regarding the priors: for the ANOVA, you cannot change the location of the para…
-
I've forwarded this to our expert EJ
-
I've forwarded this to our expert EJ
-
I've forwarded this to our expert E.J.
-
Thanks for posting, and apologies for the tardy response. I've forwarded this to our expert. Cheers, E.J.
-
Look's like it's been fixed in 0.17.3: https://jasp-stats.org/release-notes/
-
I'll check whether this has been fixed
-
Sorry about the tardy response. I've asked our expert. In my opinion, it makes more sense to enter the frequentist results, because otherwise the prior is used multiple times (but I have not made up my mind about this) E.J.
-
At a minimum this is not an informative error message. I'll ask our expert. Cheers, E.J.
-
I'll ask our expert! (Sorry for the tardy response)
-
Yes, that is possible! I recommend to use the latest version of JASP. E.J.
-
The ANOVA is traditionally based on a partitioning of the variance, which is not what the Bayesian "ANOVA" does (it is a linear mixed model). Note that we have recently changed the methodology to be more in line with the frequentist approa…
-
I'm not sure but will ask. Cheers, E.J.
-
I've attended our expert to this, but I am not sure why a simple approach such as logistic regression would not work very well in this case. Cheers, E.J.
-
This is a great request! Currently we don't offer this functionality, but we are in the process of implementing the R package "BFpack" which does allow this. Cheers, E.J.
-
I'll bring this to the attention of the experts. Cheers, E.J.
-
Hi Emma, Sorry about the tardy response. I think/hope this was a temporary glitch Cheers, E.J.
-
Correct, andersony3k. In addition, note that we have recently updated our RM Bayesian methodology to be more in line with the frequentist one. See this blog post and associated article: https://jasp-stats.org/2022/07/29/bayesian-repeated-measures-an…
-
Dear SA, So we are dealing with the scenario where the data are clearly in violation of these assumptions, meaning that the violations invalidate the usual test. In that case, I would be tempted to explore particular transformations (e.g., the log).…
-
If you could send a concrete data set that would help. Also, comparison to the classical methodology could be useful.
-
I've attended our expert to this EJ
-
First of all, it is recommended to use the latest version. If you wait a day or so, you can get the brand new 0.17.3. Then: Under "Additional options" -> "Repeatability", you can set a seed, which will yield the same result. U…
-
As an aside, I am not getting any notifications (I contacted Sebastiaan already)
-
I forwarded this to our expert E.J.
-
Yes, I am having the same problem EJ
-
I forwarded this to our expert EJ