Scioly.org

nicholasmaurer wrote:

Jacobi wrote:

pal_420 wrote:What do the rules mean by age-appropriate statistic? Does this mean we can't have more complex stuff like ANOVA?

I think it means that you shouldn't be doing mode or range for Division C.
Who knows? You might want Pearson Correlation.

Also, how would ANOVA even apply to XPD data?

Many proctors will be unfamiliar with ANOVA, so I would not recommend using it for your statistical analysis. It is certainly not necessary to do so.

At the Division C level, I would generally recommend you choose either Pearson's correlation coefficient (r and r^2) or Student's t-test. These will cover almost every scenario and are easy to calculate using a graphing calculator. It is important that you understand and interpret the meaning of the results, rather than simply reporting them.

Mean and standard deviation will almost always be the best measures of center and spread to report. Occasionally, median might be preferred, but you're unlikely to have a sufficient sample size to know if your data is skewed.

dxu46 wrote:

nicholasmaurer wrote:

Jacobi wrote: I think it means that you shouldn't be doing mode or range for Division C.
Who knows? You might want Pearson Correlation.

Also, how would ANOVA even apply to XPD data?

Many proctors will be unfamiliar with ANOVA, so I would not recommend using it for your statistical analysis. It is certainly not necessary to do so.

At the Division C level, I would generally recommend you choose either Pearson's correlation coefficient (r and r^2) or Student's t-test. These will cover almost every scenario and are easy to calculate using a graphing calculator. It is important that you understand and interpret the meaning of the results, rather than simply reporting them.

Mean and standard deviation will almost always be the best measures of center and spread to report. Occasionally, median might be preferred, but you're unlikely to have a sufficient sample size to know if your data is skewed.

What about for division B? A lot of the statistics would be much more simpler with an algorithm on a graphing calculator, but that's taken away.

dxu46 wrote:

nicholasmaurer wrote:

Jacobi wrote: I think it means that you shouldn't be doing mode or range for Division C.
Who knows? You might want Pearson Correlation.

Also, how would ANOVA even apply to XPD data?

Many proctors will be unfamiliar with ANOVA, so I would not recommend using it for your statistical analysis. It is certainly not necessary to do so.

At the Division C level, I would generally recommend you choose either Pearson's correlation coefficient (r and r^2) or Student's t-test. These will cover almost every scenario and are easy to calculate using a graphing calculator. It is important that you understand and interpret the meaning of the results, rather than simply reporting them.

Mean and standard deviation will almost always be the best measures of center and spread to report. Occasionally, median might be preferred, but you're unlikely to have a sufficient sample size to know if your data is skewed.

What about for division B? A lot of the statistics would be much more simpler with an algorithm on a graphing calculator, but that's taken away.

UTF-8 U+6211 U+662F wrote:

dxu46 wrote:

nicholasmaurer wrote:
Many proctors will be unfamiliar with ANOVA, so I would not recommend using it for your statistical analysis. It is certainly not necessary to do so.

At the Division C level, I would generally recommend you choose either Pearson's correlation coefficient (r and r^2) or Student's t-test. These will cover almost every scenario and are easy to calculate using a graphing calculator. It is important that you understand and interpret the meaning of the results, rather than simply reporting them.

Mean and standard deviation will almost always be the best measures of center and spread to report. Occasionally, median might be preferred, but you're unlikely to have a sufficient sample size to know if your data is skewed.

What about for division B? A lot of the statistics would be much more simpler with an algorithm on a graphing calculator, but that's taken away.

I would say mean and standard deviation are fairly easy to calculate by hand, but you could also use the mean absolute deviation which takes the absolute values instead of squaring and then square rooting (even easier by hand!).

dxu46 wrote:

UTF-8 U+6211 U+662F wrote:

dxu46 wrote: What about for division B? A lot of the statistics would be much more simpler with an algorithm on a graphing calculator, but that's taken away.

I would say mean and standard deviation are fairly easy to calculate by hand, but you could also use the mean absolute deviation which takes the absolute values instead of squaring and then square rooting (even easier by hand!).

Alright, thanks.

UTF-8 U+6211 U+662F wrote:

dxu46 wrote:

UTF-8 U+6211 U+662F wrote: I would say mean and standard deviation are fairly easy to calculate by hand, but you could also use the mean absolute deviation which takes the absolute values instead of squaring and then square rooting (even easier by hand!).

Alright, thanks.

(Also see Jacobi's post, although I'm skeptical of range being a good indicator of anything, and you probably won't have a mode)

Galahad wrote:Hey, does anyone know what:
(M) suggestions for other ways to look at hypothesis means?
(K) important info about data collection?
(J) all data discussed and interpreted?
means?

We never were really given clarification for it and even our coach doesn't know.

UTF-8 U+6211 U+662F wrote:Wait, is it new that Experimental Design is in the at-the-beginning-of-the-competition time block (same block as Disease Detectives)? Do we know how definite this is?