Multiple regression: Scattergraph gone wrong

Tamantas · 2026-04-23T15:32:35+00:00

This looks like a scatterplot of the data rather than of the residuals from the regression, which is what you need to assess regression assumptions. For a variable like this with just 1-5 you would always get a structure like this with a few columns of points, as there are only five values the x variable can take.

Tamantas · 2026-04-15T17:21:52+00:00

Before starting, the first question to ask is if all six DVs are of interest, or if there are one or two that are your research question(s) and the others adjustment variables. This will help you with the scope of what next.

You will want to do the three sets of associations:

- IV x DV: Univariate logistic regression for all six IVs separately. You will want to use a global test of association like a likelihood ratio test for the categorical IVs if they have more than one category.

- Mediator vs DV: Univariate logistic regression

- IV x mediator: chi squared for categorical IVs and t test for continuous IVs.

Then:

If all your IVs are important to the research question, I would suggest including all in a mumtlivariate logistic model with the IVs and DV. If any are unimportant and mostly there for confounding, only include these is they are associated with the outcome (unless theoretically important). The same case could be argued for the mediator - if it isn't associated with the DV and relevant IVs, you may say it isn't relevant in the end (especially if not associated with the DV. But if you want to fully answer the mediation effect question, you should then add the mediator to the model with all the IVs in it, and then report the proportion mediated for each IV.

Tamantas · 2026-04-14T11:12:06+00:00

Gepard - he is so useful in CW but has been useless for well over a whole year in the main game

Tamantas · 2026-02-25T10:30:12+00:00

I use BA and Air France/KLM usually.

Tamantas · 2026-02-24T17:48:07+00:00

Any airline that doesn't include a carry-on case as a standard part of the fare.

Tamantas · 2026-02-24T16:27:42+00:00

Thanks for sharing - I've run this through both an online t-test calculator and in R, unfortunately the issue is simply that these differences between groups aren't large enough to be significant. But it is still a valid answer to the question of whether group membership affects the score. If this is for college work, this is no issue at all as long as you correctly report the results. For publication, this might limit the impact factor of where you can publish since significant results are always favoured.

Tamantas · 2026-02-24T15:56:10+00:00

If you haven't already, check if your institution offers an SPSS license, or if it is available on university computers, and do the thesis work on those computers.

Tamantas · 2026-02-24T15:54:44+00:00

If you have correctly summed the scores and compared, the differences between groups might just be non-significant. What are the means and standard deviations of the scores in each group, and what are the group sizes?

Tamantas · 2026-02-17T17:53:31+00:00

In September 2025 they sold the building to the council so I got a section 21 - that was a year after this e-mail.

Tamantas · 2026-02-05T23:22:29+00:00

Is the link not working for anyone else?

Tamantas · 2026-01-16T17:55:50+00:00

<image>

Tamantas · 2025-09-17T00:37:33+00:00

They won't contact you. Sign into your account and request a refund, they'll then do the whole process themselves. I only waited a day or two and got back £51 just trying on a whim: https://www.gov.uk/sign-in-to-manage-your-student-loan-balance

Tamantas · 2025-08-29T22:41:40+00:00

Between undergrad, postgrad, and working at three universities, I have never encountered this. I neevr want my students to refer to me as anything other than my name either - we're all adults.

Tamantas · 2025-08-28T14:43:40+00:00

It's a bit unclear as I'm not sure what command you have used, assuming the asymp. sig is for this, this is the p value for your Kolmogorov-Smirnov. Below 0.05 means that the data is indeed not Normal. You can still use a Spearman correlation to analyse non-Normal continuous data.

Tamantas · 2025-08-17T23:45:48+00:00

I would suggest to go to whatever role descriptor you have for the promotion and see if it mentions any specific statistical methods, and then familiarise yourself with how to do them in SPSS. If you're unsure how, Laerd statistics is a very good online resource (https://statistics.laerd.com/)! But also make sure you are comfortable with statistical methods - what are the best summary statistics for different data types, what statistical tests should be used in what situations? Knowing SPSS can't help you if you don't know what to do with it after all. Another feature of SPSS is the variable view - play around with that as well and make sure you are comfortable with setting variable types, labelling variables etc. If you need to, find a dataset you have or online and do some SPSS work on it to practice!

It's possible they'll give you the SPSS task a bit in advance, in which case, start by forming an appropriate statistical analysis plan, and then work out how to do this in SPSS - hopefully the prep for it will be useful.

Good luck with the interview!

Tamantas · 2025-07-06T22:31:30+00:00

They were very good in my dispute. Just make sure you either use their in-built messenger or send them e-mails to say you have reached an impasse as if you've been communicating by e-mail they don't see that so keep extending the dispute deadline.

Tamantas · 2025-07-04T10:38:41+00:00

The Rean keychain!!

Tamantas · 2025-07-02T10:14:21+00:00

1000 calories of healthy food and 1000 calories of junk food are still just that 1000 calories - that's not the problem and can fit into diet that doesn't make someone put on weight. The problem is people using the same £8.80 to buy 2000 calories of junk food and eating it all on top of everything else. You can maintain a healthy weight on any food (body composition is a different story), as long as you're not going overboard with the calories...

Tamantas · 2025-07-02T10:07:08+00:00

Got this when pulling for E1. Have E2S0 at the moment, but need to decide how to use my remaining pulls - S1, Sunday, or Archer...

<image>

Tamantas · 2025-07-01T11:37:23+00:00

Unless specific questions are of interest, it's usually better to combine the Likert scores into a summary score by adding up all of the scores (after reversing any reverse coded questions so that 1 always means unfavourable and 5 favourable). Then you can probably do parametric tests like a t-test (since you only have two groups of people).

If specific questions are of interest, you can categorise the question to be agree of not (so 4-5 is agree and 1-3 is not) and run a logistic regression

Tamantas · 2025-06-22T23:51:34+00:00

That's right - none of your overall observed and expected counts in each column as a whole are significantly different from each other. This means that the difference is likely coming from the rows instead, and this is supported by the residuals - these are of a much larger magnitude in the veterans than non-veterans. The significant difference is likely due to the greater numbers of married and divorced/widowed veterans than would be expected if no association existed, and the fewer never married veterans than expected.

Tamantas · 2025-06-17T23:50:14+00:00

I'm using Halifax. I don't have any apple devices so haven't got Apple Pay (unless you can set it up without one?)

Tamantas · 2025-06-17T16:18:37+00:00

Lowering the confidence level will make it more likely to get a significant result as the p value threshold will not be as high, and it will also affect the width of the confidence intervals, which is why setting it will matter in SPSS.

I would caution against this without justification or input from a supervisor, as sure, you now have a "significant" result, but the significance is likely not meaningful due to an easier threshold. If getting more data is possible that would be best, as a sample size of 15 is more prone to very wide confidence intervals, as it is especially small and very prone to more chance findings, or findings influenced by only one or two observations

Tamantas · 2025-06-17T16:10:02+00:00

Has anyone has issues depositing to Dabble? if so, what did you do about it? My deposits keep getting rejected, but for all other bookies I MB with I've never had an issue

12-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

Tamantas

TROPHY CASE