A two-tailed test simply corrects for the appropriate probability of observing a difference as large as you observe given the null hypothesis is true. This probability is twice the one-tailed probability (in effect, a two-tailed test with alpha=0.05 is the same as two one-tailed tests each with alpha=0.025). You do not need a one-tailed test to infer ...
Mathematically, we can see that d' is independent of criterion, regardless of the criterion, by looking at the definition
$$d' = Z_D - Z_F.$$
It is tempting to argue that: (1) When the criterion is negative infinity, $P_D$ and $P_F$ are equal to unity. (2) When $P_D$ and $P_F$ are equal to unity, that $Z_D$ and $Z_F$ are equal to infinity. (3) Therefore, ...
The only difference between trial software and the 'real' thing is that trial software looses some or all functions after the trial period. Any files generated with it will be kept and be functional; only the exe file is affected. The company of course hopes that you wish to use those files after the trial period and buy the full license.
The author is simply not being explicit. The
is neither r or r2, it is simply the relation between x and y.
Pearson's correlation coefficient, or r is a measure of the linear correlation between two variables. It's value is between +1 and −1, 1 being a total positive linear correlation, 0 means no linear correlation, and −1 is total ...
There are lots of resources out there for learning R and many of the general ones are useful for people in psychology.
For example, see the R contributed documentation:
I really like the Quick-R site:
That said, in terms of psychology-specific resources, check out:
Howell is just making a distinction between types of independent variables (predictors in a regression context): continuous variables versus categorical ones.
In the case of categorical variables, like "Treatment A" and "Treatment B", your regression equation will contain variables that contrast between Treatment A and Treatment B - often this is by "dummy ...
You have one p-values for each ROI timecourse (for the largest cluster) indicating whether your conditions are exchangeable. If you want to correct for the 4 ROIs you could use any adequate multiple comparison correction, from classical Bonferroni (which might be too conservative as the tests are likely not completly independent) to Benjamini-Hochberg style ...
The widely accepted answer to this question is that homosexuality is not a choice but science has no concrete answer as to exactly why people are homosexual, heterosexual, or bisexual (or any other sexual orientations that one may identify with).
The Wikipedia page, Homosexuality, offers many great references and indicates that science has not definitive ...
In this scenario, the unrestricted group is the population of individuals who are in the selection process. For example, Held and Foley (1994, Table 3) https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/116989/v18n4p355.pdf shows the consequences of different selection ratios on validity coefficient estimations.
To summarize, the unrestricted ...
I think what we call ideologies may be too varied across time and locations to capture in a questionnaire format. If you go one level more specific, to something like support of religion, free market, or moral situations, these may be more reliably and universally measurable.
One feature that feels universal is what constitutes a moral violation. Schwartz, ...
For the sake of completeness:
eegkit, see https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/eegkit/index.html
For "historical purposes" perhaps the following could also be of interest, although development seems somewhat stagnant lately: https://rdrr.io/cran/eegAnalysis/