So, several people pointed out that this table is very weird, and I agree It's hard to see how these values are ~possible~, given the p-value beneathhttps://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1213944606510866432 …
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Basically, I'm generating two variables with the correct quartiles, where all numbers are random between those two I also skewed the numbers slightly up (making before higher and after lower) because...well, you'll see
The code runs for 100,000 iterations, then dumps it all into the file I convert the z-scores into p-values, and voila! 100,000 random simulated distributions and their p-values for a Wilcoxon paired samples test
Straight away it doesn't look good. There are very few tests where we get a significant p-value randomly (129/100000)pic.twitter.com/3kmDbe4glI
Even worse, if I only look at the simulations where the means were congruent I can't find a single simulated example where the p-value is even close to 0.022!pic.twitter.com/TLJMvrI6Z6
If I rejig the code to make the before values higher still, and the after values even lower, I can get a lot more significant results but ~none~ of the means are congruentpic.twitter.com/KAnRBe75pt
I can't find a single example where those mean, median, p-value, and quartiles are all true That's...not ideal Please have a look at my code and tell me if I've made a mistake!
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.