search

jasp-stats / jasp-issues

This repository is solely meant for reporting of bugs, feature requests and other issues in JASP.
59 stars 29 forks source link

Order restrictions in contingency table interface error: part I #5

Closed EJWagenmakers closed 4 years ago

EJWagenmakers commented 9 years ago

Order restrictions are only implemented for the indep. multinomial, and greyed out for the other choices (such as dependent multinomial). This is fine. Now suppose I select "indep. multinomial" and pick the order restriction "group 1 > group 2". This is still fine. But now I change my mind and alter "indep. multinomial" to "dependent multinomial". Then the user interface still indicates that I have an order-restriction, even though this is not implemented. image

jonathon-love commented 9 years ago

So when something is greyed out, in software UIs it means "Not applicable", rather than "You cannot change this". I think if you take a moment to think about different software packages where things are enabled and disabled, you'll find this is the case. So I think the current behaviour is the correct one. Perhaps if we grey out the "Hypothesis" heading as well, it will make it clearer.

EJWagenmakers commented 9 years ago
  1. Yes, it would be clearer to grey out "Hypothesis" as well.
  2. The fact that the behavior is similar to that of other software packages does not necessarily make it intuitive. In this case, when "joint multinomial" is specified, the tick mark in front of any one of the "hypothesis" options is potentially confusing: that tick mark is meaningless. I think it helps to omit meaningless symbols rather than adding them to the interface and requiring users to figure it out. But it isn't a big deal of course.