EJ
About
- Username
- EJ
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,557
- Last Active
- Roles
- Member, Administrator, Moderator
Comments
-
Do you have a screenshot?
-
which alternatives did you have in mind, specifically? EJ
-
So you have double-clicked on the variable name? (on top of the column) A screenshot could help...
-
https://forum.cogsci.nl/uploads/463/J0JEA7TD9GM5.jpg
-
Bayesian mediation is in JASP, right? Just not with Bayes factors under informed priors.
-
Have you looked at the example in the JASP Data Library -> Network analysis?
-
Oh I see Frantisek has already addressed this.
-
I will forward this to our expert but what I would do is start with the very simplest model, and keep adding the most important factors until the model stops running. I suspect the data are too sparse to support a relatively complex model (as is oft…
-
I've attended one of the members of our quality control team to this... EJ
-
Yes, Don! I will ask him how far he is with this. EJ
-
Before the summer there will be a *major* new update EJ
-
Whether or not you need weighting depends on your analysis, but for survey-style data it does seem wise in many circumstances. I don't think we have this yet -- please post the issue on our GitHub page...
-
Agreed! But do let us know on our GitHub page! EJ
-
:-) nice
-
It is a good feature request, we will discuss this in the team
-
This is tricky -- there will be a limit to what can be displayed, esp. in an automatic fashion. Are the same numbers reported in tables, so you could ponentially construct your own graph? I will forward this to those who are experts on this analysis…
-
You mean you would like to show the difference in a plot, right? Probably with bars for the conditions, and then horizontal lines for the comparisons? I think this is more of a feature request for our GitHub page! (for details see https://jasp-stats…
-
Ah, OK, I see the help file is not explicit about this. This is relevant for the one-sample t-test I think. I will ask our expert. EJ
-
I think this is more of an issue for our GitHub page (for details see https://jasp-stats.org/2018/03/29/request-feature-report-bug-jasp/), which will bring you in direct contact with the programmers. Also, it may help to turn on "Safe graphics&…
-
Ideally we'd have Bayes factors in addition to credible intervals, as credible intervals are conditional on a model in which the effects are present. You could use BIC as a rough estimate of the BF under relatively wide priors. EJ
-
Yes that makes sense You are right to select "compare to best model", because this yields the easiest interpretation. All models are then compared to the best one, which is "Valence". The reason for the 1.000 is because the Valen…
-
Hi Marie, That is more of an issue for our GitHub page I think (for details see https://jasp-stats.org/2018/03/29/request-feature-report-bug-jasp/). [And of course the easiest fix is to multiply your measurements by some large factor, but it would b…
-
Frequentist stats, because that is what Andy Field does too. The workshop on Thursday and Friday covers Bayes. EJ
-
Isn't this one of the models in the Process module? EJ
-
I'll also attend our expert to this! EJ
-
Dear Willo, "Select custom editor" should only be greyed out when "use default spreadsheet editor" is ticked. So this is a little strange. I recommend you post this issue on our GitHub page (see https://jasp-stats.org/feature-re…
-
Yeah but the complication with brms is that the prior distributions need to be set up with care. I have reminded our expert :-)
-
I've asked our expert for his insights...
-
I've asked our expert! EJ
-
Do you have a screenshot? Also, this might be a feature request or a bug report (in which case it is best to create an issue on our GitHub page, see https://jasp-stats.org/2018/03/29/request-feature-report-bug-jasp/)