Warning: Illegal string offset 'html' in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php on line 909

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 114

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 127

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 136

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 137

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 141
Statistics question - HSN forum

Jump to content


Statistics question


5 replies to this topic

#1 ferg

    Good Effort

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts
  • Location:Stranraer
  • Interests:driving, music, architecture
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 April 2006 - 12:43 PM

in a chi-square calc i have been asked to use both significance levels. in this case the significance gives two critical values 1 smaller than the calculated value and 1 larger. this means that the null hypothesis could be accpeted but also could be rejected. blink.gif

what is the reason for the different significance levels giving different answers (ie reject/accept) is it something to do with chance? unsure.gif

all help appreciated

#2 bred

    Brendan

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,215 posts
  • Location:Edinburgh
  • Interests:I have just graduated with a 2:1 in Geography [MA (Hons)] from The University of Edinburgh. I like sports: swimming, cycling, snowboarding, running, football, mountain biking and also travelling and photography.
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 April 2006 - 12:56 PM

The significance levels give an indication of whether there is a correlation or not. At 99% significance you can say that there is almost certainly a correlation. 95% significance also indicates a correlation, but not as strongly as 99%.

If your answer is below the critical value necessary for 99% chance of significance but above the critical value necessary for 95% chance of significance then you can reject the null hypothesis and say there appears to be a correlation, albeit not a very strong one.
Please vote for me! (Brendan Howard, 5th from bottom, only 1 vote required): http://answers.polld...m/poll/2330393/

#3 ferg

    Good Effort

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts
  • Location:Stranraer
  • Interests:driving, music, architecture
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 April 2006 - 01:02 PM

thnx! always knew a could rely on hsn 4 an answer!

#4 ferg

    Good Effort

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts
  • Location:Stranraer
  • Interests:driving, music, architecture
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 April 2006 - 01:51 PM

next problem!... with nearest neighbour analysis

my answer for Rn is 1.52 which is pretty much in the middle of Regular and Random, what does it go with or does it show that some of the villages are in a regular patern while the others are random??


#5 bred

    Brendan

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,215 posts
  • Location:Edinburgh
  • Interests:I have just graduated with a 2:1 in Geography [MA (Hons)] from The University of Edinburgh. I like sports: swimming, cycling, snowboarding, running, football, mountain biking and also travelling and photography.
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 April 2006 - 12:39 PM

That result indicates a fairly regular pattern, enough to be considered statistically significant:

IPB Image
Results outwith the yellow shaded area can be taken as statistically significant.

As you can see above, the Rn value needs to be quite close to 1 for it to be insignificant either way (especially if there are many values).
Please vote for me! (Brendan Howard, 5th from bottom, only 1 vote required): http://answers.polld...m/poll/2330393/

#6 ferg

    Good Effort

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts
  • Location:Stranraer
  • Interests:driving, music, architecture
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 April 2006 - 02:52 PM

thnx again! im the only person doing ah geo @ my school, so when i get stuck i have no 1 2 get help from!





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users