Timeline for Hypothesis test on data with confounding spatial clustering
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:44 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stats.stackexchange.com/ with https://stats.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| S Apr 21, 2013 at 22:22 | history | bounty ended | ali_m | ||
| S Apr 21, 2013 at 22:22 | history | notice removed | ali_m | ||
| Apr 21, 2013 at 22:21 | vote | accept | ali_m | ||
| Apr 15, 2013 at 1:32 | answer | added | generic_user | timeline score: 3 | |
| Apr 14, 2013 at 19:54 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackStats/status/323524560467140608 | ||
| S Apr 14, 2013 at 19:52 | history | bounty started | ali_m | ||
| S Apr 14, 2013 at 19:52 | history | notice added | ali_m | Draw attention | |
| Apr 13, 2013 at 19:02 | comment | added | ali_m | I though about this - fortunately I don't think it's a particularly likely scenario in my case. | |
| Apr 13, 2013 at 2:15 | comment | added | Peter Ellis | Is there a danger that an underlying spatial feature is a significant factor - beyond just the issue that close cells have similar scores? As the treatment cells are clustered in space, if they are unluckily in a zone that happens to impact on the response, it won't be possible to distinguish the effects. | |
| Apr 12, 2013 at 12:14 | history | asked | ali_m | CC BY-SA 3.0 |