Timeline for Simpson's paradox in Freedman, Pisani and Purves book
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 3 at 5:40 | comment | added | Frans Rodenburg |
@qwr If you're interested why some people prefer base graphics, there's a nice write-up here.
|
|
| Aug 3 at 5:19 | comment | added | qwr | You could produce a figure just as nice with a lot less code with ggplot. | |
| Aug 3 at 5:10 | history | edited | Frans Rodenburg | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 16 characters in body
|
| Aug 2 at 19:30 | vote | accept | One_Cable5781 | ||
| Aug 2 at 19:27 | history | edited | Frans Rodenburg | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Aug 2 at 19:27 | comment | added | Frans Rodenburg | @One_Cable5781 Yes indeed, they are both valid values, but one is telling something different than the other | |
| Aug 2 at 9:35 | comment | added | One_Cable5781 | Is it not true that P(admission | male) = unconditional probability of admission of a male = 0.45? So, the 39% is evaluating something else. It is, in words, supposing all applicants were male, the unconditional probability of admission of a male is 39%. Likewise, supposing all applicants were female, the unconditional probability of admission of a female is 43% . Is this the right interpretation apart from the formula used to calculate these numbers? | |
| Aug 2 at 9:32 | history | edited | Frans Rodenburg | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 11 characters in body
|
| Aug 2 at 9:27 | history | edited | Frans Rodenburg | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 11 characters in body
|
| Aug 2 at 9:21 | history | answered | Frans Rodenburg | CC BY-SA 4.0 |