5 ms·
It looks like variance is increasing as distance increases. This is bad statistics.
by darkhorn 8y ago
It looks like variance is increasing as distance increases. This is bad statistics.
- Terretta 8y ago> It looks like variance is increasing as distance increases. Given the topic, how would it not?
- darkhorn 8y agoAnd how would you validate Bartlett’s test?
- ineedasername 8y agoVariance can increase with time without invalidating the trend. Signals can attenuate with time and nonetheless still be a signal. This is very frequently the case with longitudinal studies that track outcomes from initial conditions.
- darkhorn 8y agoAnd how you validate Bartlett’s test in this case?
- ineedasername 8y agoPersonally I prefer levene's test (it's more robust in situations where the distribution may not be normal). Either way though, typical practice would be to run the tests both assuming equal variance and again not assuming equal variance. If both are statistically significant then it's a moot point, the results are statistically significant regardless of whether the variance in populations is equivalent.
- Ensorceled 8y agoThis is like saying a stone doesn’t really cause ripples because they fade away before the hit the far shore.
- darkhorn 8y agoAnd how would you validate Bartlett’s test?
- Nomentatus 8y agoYou don't think confounding variables would accumulate as the area being considered greatly increases? Why not?
- darkhorn 8y agoAnd how would you validate Bartlett’s test?