when i was an escort, there was a slight (r=0.2) negative correlation (p=0.1) between the likelihood that I had an orgasm and the physical attractiveness of my client.
27
12
205
Conversation
Replying to
Was r=0.2 or r=-0.2? The sign of r determines directionality. The p-value has nothing* to do with the strength or direction of the result, just the likelihood it’s a true result.
1
15
Replying to
It was -.2, I forgot to include negative sign.
I also know how r and p values work, I'm starting to get offended when ppl try to explain them to me for the millionth time. Like do you think I just threw those numbers in there for fun?
4
1
46
People probably get the impression you’re not very familiar with this stuff because e.g no ones calls corr. coefficient “r value”
1
I do that plenty. And I refer to r-squared and adjusted r-squared exactly like that. It was the context of effect size and correlation with the inclusion of a hypothesis testing result that caught my attention.
1
3
Weird, yeah everyone says “r-squared” but haven’t yet come across anyone trained in statistics who refers to rho as “r-value”, you just tend to say “correlation”. But yeah agreed on the p-value bit
2
1
I'm not "properly" trained in statistics, I had a friend tutor me for a while and the one thing we went over in a lot of depth was how p and r values work. I didn't really learn the correct terminology.
Oh fair, well yeah I imagine that’s gotta explain at least some of the annoying over-explanation then