zara_ruby
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#1
After running a sign test you obtain a significant result. You conclude that the effect you have found could not have resulted from chance alone. Why is this conclusion incorrect?
I get this is kinda to do with the null hypothesis and stuff I think but I'm not precisely sure how it all links together and you would answer the question. I thought that the Null hypothesis is what you start with where you assume no other factor is operating other than chance and then to get a statistically significant result suggests that the result most likely did not occur purely just by chance and supports the experimental hypothesis????
Thanks in advance for any help
0
reply
Noodlzzz
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 weeks ago
#2
look into type 1 and type 2 errors - you're on the right track
0
reply
zara_ruby
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#3
(Original post by Noodlzzz)
look into type 1 and type 2 errors - you're on the right track
Thank you!
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

University open days

  • Bishop Grosseteste University
    Undergraduate Open Day Undergraduate
    Fri, 15 Nov '19
  • University of Hertfordshire
    All Subjects Undergraduate
    Sat, 16 Nov '19
  • University of Roehampton
    General Open Day Undergraduate
    Sat, 16 Nov '19

Which party will you be voting for in the General Election?

Conservatives (15)
17.05%
Labour (35)
39.77%
Liberal Democrats (16)
18.18%
Green Party (4)
4.55%
Brexit Party (3)
3.41%
Independent Group for Change (Change UK) (0)
0%
SNP (2)
2.27%
Plaid Cymru (2)
2.27%
Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) (0)
0%
Sinn Fein (0)
0%
SDLP (0)
0%
Ulster Unionist (0)
0%
UKIP (1)
1.14%
Other (2)
2.27%
None (8)
9.09%

Watched Threads

View All