halseylg
commented
2 years ago Hi Daniel,
Well, I can certainly say that the open accessing publishing of your book has been great for me at least!
I admit that getting my head around equivalence tests is tricky, but I guess it just takes time. It might be possible to further annotate the figures and/or increase the text in the figure captions for this chapter, but of course it's always possible to add more and then there is the risk of too much information. Always a tricky balance.
I look forward to reading the next chapter...
From: Daniel Lakens @.> Sent: 31 May 2022 20:21 To: Lakens/statistical_inferences @.> Cc: Lewis Halsey @.>; Author @.> Subject: Re: [Lakens/statistical_inferences] Update 09-equivalencetest.Rmd (PR #39)
[CAUTION:] This email originated from outside of the University of Roehampton. Do not click on any links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know that the content is safe.
This is absolutely amazing - this chapter was a bit of a mess (someone actually complained about it yesterday!) and you fixed so many errors - I could not be more grateful. Thanks you!
The section on equivalence tests, is about equivalence tests. The only difference is the reversal of what is H1 and H0 -in an equivalence test, we aim to REJECT effects large enough to be meaningful. So, the H0 is the effect is large enough to matter - and H1 is we expect the effect is close to 0. So, unless I misunderstood the comment, the heading is correct.
Thanks again - this kind if helpful contributions, exactly at the right time, warms my heart, and convinces me even more that open access publishing was the right choice.
- Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FLakens%2Fstatistical_inferences%2Fpull%2F39%23issuecomment-1142552141&data=05%7C01%7Cl.halsey%40roehampton.ac.uk%7Cd1c36f04c2be44c7ac7608da433aa852%7C5fe650635c3747fbb4cce42659e607ed%7C0%7C0%7C637896216456107977%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=8SuMwoctf7%2BLgTR9itHdiAPgj%2B8RYGZULZ2OGNBAkBo%3D&reserved=0, or unsubscribehttps://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fnotifications%2Funsubscribe-auth%2FASCJTZIAXS43TLGDV74B42TVMZRATANCNFSM5XOAJ6OA&data=05%7C01%7Cl.halsey%40roehampton.ac.uk%7Cd1c36f04c2be44c7ac7608da433aa852%7C5fe650635c3747fbb4cce42659e607ed%7C0%7C0%7C637896216456107977%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=yN2VoAt1h6VAP7%2Bg94qds7HBZfr8aQ71px0nIRSq1wo%3D&reserved=0. You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: @.***>
Consider the environment. Please do not print this e-mail unless you really need to.
This email and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this email or its attachments.
Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free. University of Roehampton does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications by any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses.
Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its attachments that does not relate to the business of University of Roehampton is personal to the sender and is not given or endorsed by University of Roehampton.
University of Roehampton is the trading name of Roehampton University, a company limited by guarantee incorporated in England under number 5161359. Registered Office: Grove House, Roehampton Lane, London SW15 5PJ. An exempt charity.
This is absolutely amazing - this chapter was a bit of a mess (someone actually complained about it yesterday!) and you fixed so many errors - I could not be more grateful. Thanks you!
The section on equivalence tests, is about equivalence tests. The only difference is the reversal of what is H1 and H0 -in an equivalence test, we aim to REJECT effects large enough to be meaningful. So, the H0 is the effect is large enough to matter - and H1 is we expect the effect is close to 0. So, unless I misunderstood the comment, the heading is correct.
Thanks again - this kind if helpful contributions, exactly at the right time, warms my heart, and convinces me even more that open access publishing was the right choice.