Exact(2)
Within the same item, the difference was greater in small or large of low quality items rather than high quality and medium quantity.
Examining the same item, the difference was larger in low quality and small or large quantity rather than high quality and medium quantity.
Similar(57)
Each test incorporated non-transfer and transfer items, the difference of which was that the latter were more difficult than the former.
To perform tests of significance on responses to matched items, we calculated the standardized residuals as post hoc analyses on matched items (the difference between the observed and expected values converted to a z score).
Although interim testing led to better performance across all items, the difference between the two groups was largest for neutral and misleading trials (consistent: t 86) = 2.58, P = 0.01 (ns after Bonferroni correction); neutral: t 86) = 6.67, P < 0.001, d = 1.44; misleading: t 86) = 4.43, P < 0.001, d = 0.90).
However, for only half of the items the difference is statistically significant.
For most single HDI items, the difference in intake between the lowest and highest quartiles were as expected.
For dichotomous variables (first three items) the difference (item present minus absent) in mean HR-QoL scale value is shown, for continuous variables (last item) the Spearman correlation coefficient is shown.
For dichotomous variables (first two items) the difference (item present minus absent) in mean HR-QoL scale value is shown, for continuous variables (last two items) the Spearman correlation coefficient is shown.
For adult-referenced items, the difference in goodness of fit on changing from the 1PL model to the DIF model was χ2 = 201.4, df = 18, P < 0.001.
The average responses from the classroom-based GEP students show greater gains than those reported by summer (SURE) students on 19 of 20 items, although for many of the items, the difference was not statistically significant.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com