4 ms·
Why would age (3 groups), which they did partition on, be statistically significant but not sex (2 groups, assuming no intersex)?
by daenz 5y ago
Why would age (3 groups), which they did partition on, be statistically significant but not sex (2 groups, assuming no intersex)?
- chmod775 5y agoThat's just not what I said.
- daenz 5y ago>maybe because that would have made the groups too small to yield useful data How would 2 groups be "too small to yield useful data" when 3 groups yield useful data.
- chmod775 5y agoBecause you would be subdividing again, which yields 6 groups. Also read my last paragraph about 'playing' with your data like that.
- daenz 5y ago>Because you would be subdividing again, which yields 6 groups No, it would be 2 groups if the single partition was sex. It would only be 6 groups if they also wanted to slice each group again by age, which is not what I'm asking. The 2 groups are not "too small" if 3 groups are not "too small." >Also read my last paragraph about 'playing' with your data like that. I did, and I think that's valid. However, it has no bearing on my point about the size of the groups.
- lazyasciiart 5y agoMaybe they were all boys.
- daenz 5y agoThe sex split is within the first sentence of the study Abstract. It was 54% girls.