I’m
still unclear what the issue is here? First, why have some
suggested anything other than 50% as the false discovery
rate? Aren’t random guessing of yes or no (no condition,
just guessing, the null hypothesis) no different than
flipping a coin, thus 50:50? In terms of the statistic, you
can use a non-parametric statistic for this, but if you code
it as 1’s and 0’s, then it’s a ratio with normal
distribution, and thus a one sample t-test can work.
Remember that it’s comparing the mean of your sample against
the mean of a normal sample with a mean set to the value you
set, in this case, .5 (right?). If this is wrong, I’d like
to know why, as I really don’t understand.
I’m
pretty certain that the nature of the condition, in the
question you asked, is unimportant. You are wanting to test
it against chance guessing, which would be equal to no
condition at all. I believe you would only want to adjust
for this if you had a priori information that chance
guessing was in fact biased in some way. It appears to me
that no such evidence exists, so you would keep the value at
.5. It really seems simpler than people are making it out
to be, but maybe I’m wrong on this.
Matthew
J Poes
Research
Data Specialist
Center
for Prevention Research and Development
University
of Illinois
510
Devonshire Dr.
Champaign,
IL 61820
Phone: 217-265-4576
email:
[hidden email]
From:
SPSSX(r) Discussion [[hidden email]]
On Behalf Of Fredric E. Rose, Ph.D.
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 12:28 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Frequency analysis
Wow.
What an incredibly condescending comment. Thank you for
enriching everyone’s life for it, especially since you know
little to nothing about what I do, who I am, or why I am
asking the question. I spared the list the irrelevant
details regarding the background of the question and focused
more on a desire for some insight on statistical analysis of
nonparametric data and boy am I glad you were here to school
me.
As to the paper you mentioned...yes, I have it and have read
it. And others. They don’t address the question that I
asked because those numbers all relate to norms of the DRM
lists and I was not asking how to determine whether the rate
of false recall in one study differed from the rate in
another using the same lists. Perhaps I didn’t express it
clearly, or perhaps I should be faulted for not having read
every single paper on false memory (shame on me – there
probably aren’t that many) but thank you for informing me
that the SPSS list is not the place to ask questions of a
statistical nature. Imagine my surprise, given that I’ve
been a subscriber to this list for 7+ years and have read
countless questions of this type, all answered by other
subscribers. Apparently, things have changed.
If you don’t mind, Rich, take a look in the upper right
corner of your keyboard. You’ll see a key that is probably
marked “Delete”. Should I ever choose to post to this list
again, daring to ask for information about the application
of SPSS to a statistical problem, feel free to use that key
so that you might be spared my stupidity.
To the rest of the list – I appreciate your insights and
thank you for taking the time to answer a question that at
least one of us feels was beneath him. I feel (somewhat
naively, apparently) that it is an interesting question on
probability but fear there may not be an easy answer.
On 4/18/12 6:10 PM, "Rich Ulrich" <rich-ulrich@...>
wrote:
I
Googled on
<Roediger and McDermott False Memory>
and found, immediately, an article on "Factors that
determine false recall..."
http://memory.wustl.edu/Pubs/2001_Roediger.pdf
And the intro mentions rates from 0.01 to 0.65.
If you are going to start into doing research, you really
need to do a large amount of reading to prepare yourself,
both in general (when you know little about research)
and on your specific topic.
--
Fredric E. Rose, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Psychology
Palomar College
(760) 744-1150 x2344
frose@...